Bhakti Terrorists -

I find it very hard to believe that Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja actually said this.

The date of this talk is needed to properly research.

March 35, 1897 B.C.

1974

Subal, do you think your Guru Maharaj was serious when he made this comment?

i remember that day

quote not in folio. what is the source of this quote

I have a tape of a conversation in Honolulu in which a disciple brought this up. Prabhupada countered with something like, "No, for ordinary people our process is to give mercy. This would only be for someone who obstructs our preaching in a big way--like Mao."

You have not proven that He said this yet.

Why go through this muck in order to prove yourself holy?

Now, such statements will have some serious social ramifications. Is it not permitted to dispassionately discuss them without having someone hammer you down for trying to prove yourself holy?

I think that statements of this sort were widely known in the movement in Prabhupada's time. Another went something like, "We can use atom bomb for Krishna. Chant Hare Krishna or else." Or the heavy statement about killing fake avataras, directed at Guru Maharajji, which resulted in 20 or so devotees being jailed in Houston when one devotee repeated it to some of the Guru Maharajji festival organizers.

Whether or not it's in the Folio, it was known and accepted without question.

I think that a statement like this would leave an indelible impression on the one hearing it, especially if he sees himself as a love and peace kind of guy.

---

I have speculated before that the kind of fanatical zeal that went into preaching in the early days may have had its uses, but these uses are limited and ultimately alienating.

The sociology of religion has studied NRMs for some time now. The general classifications given are (1) Church (2) Sect (3) Denomination (4) Cult.

A lengthy discussion of these categories can be found at the following sites:A lengthy discussion of these categories can be found at the following sites:

A lengthy discussion of these categories can be found at the following sites:
• [URL=http://www.adherents.com/classify.html
• [URL=http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~reli238/what2.htm[/URL]
[QUOTE]
[QUOTE]...Typically, these follow the "church"--"denomination"--"sect"--"cult" continuum. Churches are well-established religious orthodoxies, whereas denominations are accepted branches. Many sociologists (Saliba cites here Rodney Stark and William Bainbridge) use sect to denote a splinter group from an established denomination, whereas cults are made up of novel elements (Saliba 8). Saliba also points out the Latin meaning of cult, or cultus, which suggests a style of worship for a particular deity (Saliba 1). The worship of Bacchus, for example, would constitute a cult within ancient Roman Paganism. This leads to a final definition of "cult" and "sect." Sociologists also speak of movements as having sectarian cores and a cultic fringes. Commitment levels increase as one reaches the core, hence a cultic orientation would indicate here that one exists on the edge of a movement, lacking the intensity and commitment of sectarian members. In sum, cult can refer to the quality of one's religious involvement, but in sociolological language, it may also refer to the quantity, or type of involvement.[/QUOTE]

I personally heard from one of the GBC members that Bhaktivedanta Swami did say during an interview that if a war broke out and the devotees had atomic bombs they would use it against "demons". He also said the he came as an aggressor to the West.

I have just found this interesting glorification in the preface of a book on the Gita written by a disciple of Bhaktivedanta Swami:

"To Srila Prabhupada,

who combated illusion
with the fury of Arjuna,
the powerful, victorious
and ferocious warrior hero,
but who also embodied
the gentle simplicity of
fearless Prahlad, a young boy."

One becomes afraid when hearing the word "Arjuna" or "ksatriya" in Iskcon because these two terms are generally used for justifying arrogance, agressive mentality and hatred, or even violent acts against other devotees.

Yes,you're right
I have to admit going out to drop 'bombs' on the laps of them meat-eating 'karmis'
ooooo the shame of it --all with the hightest and most noble intentions.
I felt like a suicide bomber
We all wanted to be martyers for Mahaprabhu
but in the end
I am still a rotten hippie full of bad habits with no love for Radha and Krishna.
I've been conned,hoodwinked and takin in for a bd trip.
guess i gotta grow up and learn from my foolish mistakes as a fanatical zealot cultist Hare Krishna.

At any rate, it's things like this that lead to self-definition.

What I mean is that there are defining moments like this when you realize there are fundamental differences between your own disposition and those of your associates--senior, junior or equal.

This should be understood by those here who have conflicting ideas about what constitutes devotion to Mahaprabhu.

Yes. He was speaking in his normal spontaneous manner as he did on those walks. He did say, "Not now but later when we are more powerful." Hopefully that day will never come.

Remember, the principle was that we could do anything for Krishna. The end justified the means. This resulted in fraud and con tactics, drug dealing, murder and prostitution being used by some devotees. Now some argue whether Bhaktivedanta was aware of these things going on or not. He certainly was pleased with the devotees who brought money and wasn't concerned with how they got it. The biggest wheeler dealers became the biggest ISKCON leaders.

I don't think the name of this thread is entirely justified. Perhaps it should be Bhakti Fascists.

All of us knows the famous saying: "By hook or by crook sell the book". I was personally witnessing a zealous sankirtan devotee coming back from "sankirtan" and telling the guru how he cheated a family: first he sold a set of books to the husband, then the same to the wife. The guru was laughing in appreciation. Nobody ever cared what happens to those books, if people ever read them, the point was to make much "Laksmi". The general concept was: "Better we take the karmis money or else they would spend it on meat and cigarettes." I remember how I hated those meetings on Sunday mornings when the temple president read aloud the scores: "Kaupin Prabhu had sold 20 Gitas, this is that much Laksmi, KIII-JAAAAY!" When my father warned me that this whole stuff is all about money, I called him a demon and told him he would go to hell. He was right.

This is the outcome of that infamous request: "Whatever you do, do it for Krishna", which someone in a nother thread, an Iskconite apparently, justified as the way of bhakti proper.

It is good to hear this from someone who was there, saw it and heard it, witnessed it. Thank you Subal for your courage. Good for you that you had the strength to say "No" to this, that something in you revolted against this sort of guru-ship.

I think what is important now, for me, is to see this clearly, acknowledge it, then leave it, in a sense to forget it without suppressing it.- But it remains a heroic deed of yours, Subalji, to express it and stand up for it.

I say it is heroic, in contrast to another dramatic circumstance, the special mental state of Bhakitsiddhanta, for which the last possible witness who acknowledged it refused to testify openly about it: The witness said that he did not feel up to it. That it was not his thing to testify for it openly.

Radhe!

what could i tell,yo!

germany, the sankirtan mecca!

i hated those sankirtan-meetings or festivals too.
man, i was two times in Zurich, on 31 of december.
what a great philosophical meeting.
only stories about how the books got bombed into the stupid "karmis" houses.

i tried to sell books, too.
like everyone else my meditation was: BOOKS OUT! SCORE!

very spiritual, yep.

sometimes i tried to ask philosophical questions during a sankirtan-lecture.
man, some wanted to crucify me.

in Germoney they also declared that selling crappy oil-paintings from Hongkong is spiritual.
they bought it for 10 US and sold it up to 10000 deutschmarks.

and then the general (Harikesa Swami) leaves and the whole show goes Titanic.

i am very happy to be here
Tarunji

Radhe!

i also forgot to say "thank you" to Subal das.
what honesty!

i also witnessed so many times the money-thing.
hook or crook, remember?

by the way, dear Subal, showing your inner guts is nice.
i´m in the same club.

My ISKCON temple president used to quote this often in his 'Srimad Bhagavatam' lectures in the early 1980's.

Well you know, Madhava, in that other thread where you addressed Hari Sharans question about the author of the Varnashram Manifesto, and you explained
Nazi not as in burning the Jews, but Nazi as social organisation, there I skipped a possible and required answer: That was exactly what that book spoke about, using guns against those not taking the Holy Name.

There was never any doubt that Harikesh did not represent his guru 100% in that book. If one represented him, then it was him, Harikesh. Seen from this point of view Harikesh's courage to stand up and leave also needs to be acknowledged. The way he did it (with the millions) and the consequences (for his disciples) are still debatable. But under such SICK circumstances the courage to stand for one's own sense of failure is a great thing, it is honorable in my opinion.

Some people misunderstand when I rant and rave, but I feel really regretful of all of the lying and cheating I have done in the name of religion. I share my experiences with others in order for others to develop some integrity, self-esteem and self-respect; it is not religious to lie, cheat and abuse people's submission in the name of religion. Pehaps it was my bad karma, but I have seen lots of incredible things in my temple living days. And, it is sometimes frustrating to see people turn a blind eye and pretend these things did not happen.

Similar to this: once during a "darshan" the famous Suhotra Swami was asked by a female devotee about what she should do when her parents start to criticize Iskcon and Prabhupad. His answer was: "If they get offensive towards Prabhupad, you can do ANYTHING to them." The same Swami led an attack against a group of devotees in Vienna who left Isckon, their little shop was completely destroyed. According to witnesses the attackers were armed. But later he apologized. How gracious.

Société Internationale pour la Conscience de Krishna.

I'm not questioning anyone's experience here, but personally I take these as the words of a colorful eccentric, to use the vilified words of a Prabhupada disciple. Unfortunately I think we will find imperfection in anyone, should their every word be recorded or if we spend enough time with them. They are bombastic, no doubt, but I don't think they are to be taken seriously. To take them seriously, either in accepting them or in opposing them, is fall into the trap of literalism, IMO. We err, we get carried away by the moment or the association. Many a politician has been dragged down for a careless comment and many of us would probably be jailed if utterances were action.

Maybe I'm rationalizing. Oh well.

Anyway, I agree with Nabadwip. Let's keep our perspective. There were a lot of mistakes made. If Mahaprabhu is still meaningful to us despite it all, let us bow in gratitude to those who made it possible, despite their failings real or apparent.

The most important point to be acknowledged is: The corruption was there from the start, thru the founder, not just in the "bad" followers. This is regarding the most important lie that is being told. It is there in the system itself!

On the other hand, if I can know that, and reach a state within myself where it does not matter, without declaring it toward the outside that it did not matter (because it does in an exoteric sense), then I can be really happy with what is there. Aaaah, these beautiful Jagannathas everywhere. Atreya Rishi had the most wonderful small marble Gaur-Nitai murtis in San Francisco, with such a bewitchingly beautiful smile...

And my happiest time of my life I ever spent was in the Zürich temple working for the BBT, and worshiping Hansadutta's tiny Jagannath-murtis that he left there. They steal my mind. And still do.

Jai Nitai.

Any ordinary devotee can afford to say improper things. We ourselves do that every day. But if you accept disciples, if you tell them that accepting a guru means to consider him as good as God, if you allow hundreds of people crawling on the ground before you and offering flowers to your lotus feet, if you are willing to accept their money, if you allow your pictures to be put on altars for worship, this is a lot different situation. Then you are supposed to be careful of what you say.

This is, obviously, where the basic difference lies between those who make the decision to abandon the Gaudiya Math and those who decide to stick it out.

I think this is true for you former ACBS-disciples, but not for us later-comers. I came to my practice thru attraction, and: true, some unhappiness with my previous association, but it had nothing to do with this particular issue. I think this is important to state, because new-comers to the traditional lines should not think, that the assertion of the above fact is a requirement for that step.

I think the acknowledgement is necessary to become aware of the traps that are there in the system itself, to not take things lightly.

I am glad you point that out. I know that there were some European Vaishnavas who had come to take traditional gurus without ever having been involved with Iskcon. They used to avoid us ex-Iskconers studiously, as I suppose we still had that glare in our eyes...

Well they all had some experience with them, otherwise they would not recognise that glare.... Seriously, I personally dont know a single traditional Western Vaishnava who had absolutely nothing to do with Iskcon. They were at least Sunday feast congregational visitors.

Quite probably so.

I seem to have stirred up quite a storm. I hope it is cathartic for everyone. I appreciate the praises of some of you and I have also received my share of villification from others over the years. It is hard speaking the truth. I have always been straight forward and outspoken. That often gets me in trouble both within the the church and in ISKCON. Yet I have no regrets. I have always done what I had to do. I have integrity which I value highly.

I believe someone said I am trying to make myself seem holy through all this. I am not a fan of holy. I do like being whole. As a clergy I do not like being called Reverend. I don't like being put on a pedestle where I can be too easily knocked down. In fact I am quite irreverent and like it that way. As a sannyasi, I did not like carrying a danda and having people touch my feet, esp. when I first went to Vrindaban and brajabasis came up to me in a temple and touched my feet. I felt very unworthy. I am an ordinary person. I like that.

I gave spiritual guidance today to a guy who over-dosed, died, was revived, has brain damage and wants to get his life back together and start meditating. I got much satisfaction from that and I think he was comfortable with me. I spent three hours talking with one of the partners in the store where I will soon have my office. We were able to relate and connect very well. That makes me very happy. I spoke on the phone today with a pastor friend and told her of my latest undertakings. She invited me to take part in her worship service this Sunday. That makes me happy. I like being able to relate to alll kinds of people and not be set apart and I think that's what holy means--"set apart." Like I tell my wife, "I'm just a guy. What can I do?" I have my faults and I have my virtues, but I don't try to be anything but what I am.

Yes, I think the whole system is at fault. When we elevate our gurus to too high a position and worship them and consider them to be like God. Who can live up to such a standard? I don't care if we're talking about Bhaktivedanta, Bhaktivinode, Jesus, Budha, the pope or whoever. We're projecting our own projections on these people. They can't handle it, and we'll utilmately be let down. They're all just guys doing the best they can.

Find the guru within. We all have a direct, personal relationship with God. We don't need to depend on someone else. We can certainly learn from one another, but the job of the guru should be to help the disciple become spiritually independent and self realized. One certainly should not develop dependent, self serving relationships and then abuse the love of the disciples. That is unforgivable.

So, Jai Radhe! Keep the faith, try to find the truth within, live life fully, give thanks and live up to your full potential. BTW, don't forget to love extravagantly.

Your servant,
Subal

According to Harikesh, Gurukrpa was giving money to Bhaktivedanta Swami from drug traffic sales, much to Bhaktivedanta Swami's awareness, for the financing of the Vrndavan Krsna-Balaram Mandir. In 1977 Gurukrpa was arrested and thrown in jail in the Netherlands for some 5-7 years.

Some may want to shrug this off as not true or whatever. People get uptight when I bring this up. It may not even have any relevance to some. It does to me. I had two brothers that died in their early thirties from related drug addictions. It is sad that a temple of God was financed on drug money, even more so, when the principles we vowed on our 'supposed' initiation was that we refrain from intoxication.

It is even sadder to hear people rationalize this incident with the story of the four mystics who plunderred people in South India to construct the Sri Ranganath Mandir in South India. I hear people say, "Prabhupada purified that money."

I agree whole-heartedly with Subal--I like to have some integrity in my life and stand up for what is right for whatever it is worth. The seeds of deciet will remain within our hearts till we uproot them, recognize and the value of virtue, being honest with ourselves and others. Living in denial is self-deceit. It will not bring us in touch with our souls.

RAGHUNATH DAS GOSWAMI MANAH SIKSA-

ARE CETAH PRODYAT KAPATA KUTINATI BHARA KHARA
KSARAN MUTRE SNATVA DAHASI KATHAM ATMANAM API MAM
SADA TVAM GANDHARVA GIRIDHARA PADA PREMA VILASAT
SUDHAMBHODHAU SNATVA SVAM API NITARAM MAM CA SUKHAYA

are -O!; cetah - mind; prodyat - rising; kapata - deceitfulness; kutinati - diplomacy; bhara - full; khara - ass; ksarat - trickling; mutre - in the urine; snatva - having bathed; dahasi - you burn; katham - why; atmanam - yourself; api - even; mam - me; sada - always; tvam - you; gandharva - Srimati Radharani; giridhara - Krsna; pada - feet; prema - love; vilasat - shines; sudha - nectar; ambodhau - in the ocean; snatva - having bathed; svam - yourself; api - even; nitaram - always; mam - me; ca - also; sukhaya - gladden.

O mind! Why are you burning me and yourself by bathing in the trickling ass-urine of obvious deceitfulness and diplomacy? Always bathe in the glistening nectar-ocean of love for Gandharva and Giridhari (Radha and Krsna) and make me and yourself ever-happy!

Commentary by Ananta Das Pandit: Through some indescribable good fortune a soul whose heart is pierced by lusty desires comes to the path of devotion, but then still the vices he is accustomed to in innumerable births are pulling at him. The living being is Krsna's eternal servant, therefore every desire other than the desire to serve Krsna is falsification (deceit) of his svarupa, his eternal constitutional position. Vices such as diplomacy, deceitfulness, forbidden behaviour and violence towards others, that come forth from his being accustomed to freedom in physical enjoyment, are creating so many obstacles on the devotee's way that stop him from advancing.

According to the dictionary the word 'kapata' can mean 'deceit', 'slyness', 'chicanery', 'fraud', 'swindling', 'untruthful behaviour', 'irreligious behaviour' and 'sin'. satyam jnanam anandam: truth is knowledge and bliss. How can the Supreme Truth (satyam param dhimahi) Sri Krsna, ever be pleased with our hearing, chanting, puja, smarana and japa when we are still lying and cheating (ourselves and others)? When that lying, fraudulent cheating propensity, that is even considered a sin in ordinary worldly scriptures on morality, comes in contact with bhagavad bhajana, it is no longer an ordinary sin but turns into a great offense. In an unreal heart this cheating and stealing propensity will gradually extend towards the sadhu, guru and the Lord also. It is said 'Don't become a ghost by dying in Gaya', or: all the ghosts can be delivered in Gaya, except for Gaya's own ghosts! All cheating can be forgiven and removed by the sadhus and the guru, but if we cheat the sadhus and the guru we will be doomed. Still we do not repent for this in any way, rather we try to cover up our sinful activities with a veil of hypocrisy and excuses, like: "There was no sin committed, actually it was allright!". But the fortunate saints do not misbehave like that. They repent after feeling the burning sensation of regret within themselves for any injustice they may have committed, and they become eager to atone in a proper way. Sripada Raghunatha has therefore compared this burning sensation with a bath in the trickling urine of an ass.

The word kutinati means 'unreal activities', 'absorption in other things', 'mercilessness', 'violence' and other things. asat kriya kutinati, chado anya paripati (Prema Bhakti Candrika) "Give up all these clever tricks and unreal activities known as kutinati!" Bodily consciousness is the main obstacle in our lives of bhajana, and it is the main cause of the devotee performing unreal, merciless and violent activities. Therefore Sri Narottama Thakura has said: dehe na koriho astha, morile se yama sasta, duhkera samudra karma-gati "Don't put your faith in your material body, for when you die you will be punished by Yamaraja. The course of karma is an ocean of suffering." We don't pay attention to insignificant errors, but in the end they become very harmful obstacles to the execution of bhakti.

"I have heard from the scriptures and the sadhus that all my sadhana is useless like an elephant's bath if I consider Sri Gurudeva to be an ordinary human being, and I try to bring that message to others also, but actually I am dealing with my Sri Gurudeva in a worldly manner, quarrelling and arguing with him and at times treating him even worse than an ordinary human being. I profess that blasphemy of a Vaisnava is an offense to the holy name, but meanwhile I like to make my mouth coarse by meeting with five or ten people and speaking bad about other devotees." Lying and misbehaving towards others is an ordinary sin, but when doing this with a Vaisnava it becomes an offense and destroys our devotion. "I have only read this, but when I come to the market I'm lying during business transactions, and if someone by accident gives me too much change back I'm very happy with the profit that I stick in my pocket!"

Compassion, forgiveness and humility are some of the ornaments (virtues) of the great devotees. daya means that the heart melts when one sees the suffering of others; this is a stream of nectar. The hearts of Krsna's devotees are naturally (soft and delicious) like nectar and are therefore naturally filled with compassion. "But as a result of my bodily consciousness a person like me is always giving different kinds of misery to the saintly Vaisnavas with his words and behaviour, what to speak of ordinary people? I even consider it a kind of amusement to give all kinds of pain to others, it has become a kind of habit!" This habit will ultimately take the form of a terrible monster of violence and hatred.

Sri Raghunatha says: "O mind! You are burning yourself to death by constantly bathing in the burning ass-urine of deceitfulness and diplomacy, and you're constantly burning me (the soul) with it as well! There's no other way to end this calamity and soothe yourself than to enter into the nectar-lake of love of God, that's why I say: sada tvam gandharva giridhara prema vilasat sudhambhodhau snatva svam api nitaram mam ca sukhaya. "Always bathe in the nectar ocean of the love of Gandharva and Giridhara and make yourself and me happy!"

Some interesting points have been made in this thread. I think it is important for all of us to acknowledge that our experience and our understanding of words and actions is subjective, not absolute. As such we will each have a different perspective on 'historical' events.

The one thing I am always struck with is that A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami came to America at a very advanced age and his upbringing and social background were completely foreign to 'the American culture (if you can put your finger on such a thing). The reason that this fact is so striking to me is because many of the things that he said and the way he said them can only be properly understood if you begin to understand his history.

Another thing that is striking to me is that what is readily understood and taken as axiomatic in hindu society is foreign to those in the west and the way they take certain instructions may be quite detrimental to their progress. The whole concept of Guru as good as God is a very foreign idea to the western mind set and the way it was thought of and implemented turned out to be pathological and very detrimental to many. But it should also be noted, as I said before, each persons perception is unique and there are really no universals involved here.

Most people are aware of the very simple exercise in communication where you start with a simple message passed to one person and you spread that message from person to person through, say 15 to 20 people, and when the message comes back to it's source it is so distorted it often has no resemblance to the original message. Within Iskcon there was so much heresay and anyone who was in that society knew that any statement preceded or followed with the qualifier 'Prabhupada said' made it instantaneously authoritative.

So what I am really trying to say? 1) A.C. Bhaktivedanta undoubtedly said many things that were taken out of context because it was impossible for those who were from a different culture to fully understand the context. 2) Messages were distorted and changed such that they became the outrageous and obviously deviant messages that are so easy to lash out against.

A.C. Bhaktivedanta had the unique power to enthuse others and engage people from around the world in acts of devotion directed toward Krsna. The fact that so many people got it wrong and that many are having a hard time sorting it all out shouldn't be that difficult to comprehend - afterall, Rupa Goswami has told us that one of the characteristics of suddha bhakti is that it is very rare.

Sitting back behind a computer screen and finding fault with what A.C. Bhaktivedanta said or did will not be conducive to anyone's spiritual growth. Seeing the good in others, on the other hand, is what we are called to do. Our thoughts should be directed at our own faults and trying to correct them.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

AC Bhaktivedanta and shuddha-bhakti?


dont you mean aropa-siddha-bhakti?





nice point.
only that speaking the truth is not necessarily faultfinding.

one more thing, dear Audarya-lila dasa,
you once chastised me for having a weak argument-line.
i just wanted to humbly remind you about your point:
"My guru gave me the brahma-gayatri, and i do what my guru says..."
nicely said and i wish i had the faith you have, but there is also something called "blind following".
just because SNM said via his secretaries that one should dump the books of Srila Ananta das into the ocean, i dont have to follow his or their advice, even if he was my Guru then.

of course its also very nice to feel comfortable and just do what the Guru says.

i once heard that if the Guru says something which is not in line with sadhu and shastra, then it must be rejected.

yeah, i know. from your point of view its totally in line with sadhu and shastra.
just a question of whom you prefer to follow.

just some thoughts.

your last point was really nice.
i hope people from your lineage have also read it.
maybe then they think twice about challenging posts.

all the best
Tarunji

PS:
when someone finds "faults" or "mistakes" of ACBVS or BSS and proves it also by sadhu/shastra, then its immediately "OFFENSIVE".
worse, nobody can really hide his face and eyes from the obvious concoctions.
but yeah, thats then blasphemy.
to hell, Tarunji!

It may be of interest that one of the core reasons while Gurukuli alumnis have banded together to sue ISKCON was not just for the money. They did so because they saw how in ISKCON their parents did not denounce the warped teachings presented by Bhaktivedanta Swami regarding child upbringing and education.

I find the heading of this thread 'Bhakti Terrorist' befitting. Why are people so put-off by the Musilim community now-a-days? Because they do not strongly denounce terrorism. The majority in the Mid-East (according to a recent CNN report on a survey conducted) give value to suicide bombings and terrorism as a means of getting points across to the world.

I feel that unless individuals stop living in deniel and hide behind 'you should not find fault with the pure devotee' progression on the path of self-realization will be hampered.

Yes, I was not there when Gurukripa handed dope money to Bhaktivedanta. But one thing is for sure, Gurukripa, the renounced swami at that time, has his name engraved in stone as the top money contributer to the Krsna-Balaram mandir. Just look at it when you go to the Krsna-Balarama Mandir. I personally heard from a Gurukul student in Vrndavan back in the spring of 1978 that Gurukripa was no longer active in ISKCON because of drugs. He was in jail in the Netherlands--Bhagavan, former ISKCON guru of western Europe used to visit him. I heard this from 2 other independent sources as well. Harikesh told of this incident to one of my close friends in Europe just a couple of years ago when he was living in his home in France (picture in the web). Harikesh said he saw it with his own eyes. It is not just some gossip. I don't make-up wide statements for the sake of putting people down. It is a serious and grave offense to do so.

You should also find it striking that many of us joined a religious organization in our teens--something Bhaktivedanta did not do. That meant that many of us gave up our education for economic stability--something Bhaktivedanta Swami did not do either. Some of us lived in poverty stricken conditions in the west--something Bhaktivedanta Swami did not do. Some of us even married with kids depended on a poor religious community for substanance sacrificing the family for the mission of the religion--something Bhaktivedanta did not do as well. Give devotees a little more credit for their sacrifice as well. I become dumb-founded when people say ISKCON was created solely Prabhupada. ISKCON devotees made ISKCON too. It would not have happened without their sacrifice.

Some quotes of interest:


Later on that year, however, the tone is different.

Go figure.

I don't think anyone would argue with the facts regarding Gurukripa or any other person where the historical record is unequivacal. A.C. Bhaktivedanta did not teach anyone to use or distribute drugs. Although he definitely did use money from those who collected it in less than exemplary ways, he certainly did not condone or encourage anyone to engage in questionable or unethical behavior. You can certainly debate the idea that by accepting such funds he was indirectly condoning the method of aquisition, but whatever your opinion on that is - it will not be universally held. Certainly no one would argue that he misused the funds or spent them on anything other than seva to Mahaprabhu.

As far as the gurukula goes - no doubt it was a mistake to take a traditional Indian system and try to implement it in the west. I don't believe that A.C. Bhaktivedanta can be faulted for his intentions, but the application of the idea was way off base and the 'experiement' should have been halted. Maybe He expected too much of his disciples and maybe his disciples could have been more honest with him regarding what they were actually doing. Jagat probably has a lot to say about the gurukula, but then again he has already said quite a bit and he may not feel like rehashing what he has already spoken volumes on.

Subal - You seem to have a very protestant idea of how to approach God. Maybe that is why so many Catholics embraced Gaudiya vaishnavism - the clear siddhanta is that our approach to God is indirect - ie. those who claim to be devotees of Krsna are not actually so - but only those who claim to be servants or the servants of God. The Catholics have a very clear idea about how to approach God and ask for the intercession of saints. They also view the priest as the vicar of Christ. Their beliefs and practices are much closer to the Gaudiya approach than are those of the protestant Christian denominations. That is why Mirabhai is not accepted in the same light by Gaudiya acharyas as she is by others - she tries to approach directly - her songs are mostly about her and Krsna, but none of his parshadas, and she never glorifies or mentions her own guides.

There is a genuine need for every sincere seeker to associate with advanced practicioners who have transcended the dictates of the mind and senses. That doesn't mean they cease to be human and all that goes with it - it merely means that they exemplify that which we seek for ourselves. They have developed genuine bhakti such that they are distracted or disturbed by gross sense pleasures or the allurements of the material world. In essence, they are genuine devotees who have actually developed love. Krsna tells us in the Bhagavad gita that one must approach a spiritual master and render service to him/her and place relevant inquiries to such a person - why? Because he has genuine experience and has seen the truth. So this person isn't any ordinary person - he/she is extradinary due to genuine spiritual experience and because of that they can help you. You might not agree with it, but that is the siddhanta that all gaudiya vaishnavas embrace.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

Dear Radhapada,

I never said that A.C. Bhaktivedanta did everything on his own. I appreciate all the sacrifice and seva that all the devotees performed. Without all of them I would never have even thought to take up chanting or been attracted to Krsna in any substantial way. I would have probably just thought he was a mythological hindu god - one amongst the many.

I believe that if you look at the history you will find that A.C. Bhaktivedanta did indeed give up home comfort and family and that he did indeed live in poverty conditions on the lower east side of Manhattan when he came to preach in America.

Be that as it may, I bow my head to all those devotees who sacrificed so much to help spread the mission of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and by whose efforts so many books were published and so many temples established.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

I admire Audariya-lila das's capacity to walk blind-folded thru all this, and still justify everything. I guess there is no other choice with so much evidence. It is this capacity to justify which gives me goose-bumps; this is what happens with Fascists and Stalinists everywhere.

No offence to all the U.S. Americans reading. But your culture is soooo much infested with telling lies. Your top-ass in the governement can tell lies every day, and people still find him great. Even your PBS, the pinnacle of culture on TV, all it's ever talking about is the non-events of U.S. history. Your news-papers are garbage-bins for advertizing. Most of your movies are Kitsch, or at best technological wonders. Iskcon is an American invention. It has exported the American ways of lying into spiritual books and types of behaviour, and spread that poison all over the world.

You should see the superiority complex of the American Iskconites preaching in Europe. Arrogance personified, even though they are cultural idiots. That was true for Harikesh, not to speak of Bhagavan, and all the subordinates as well. Iskcon is an American lie. And ACBS was infected by the U.S. megalomania. He told Subal to build a sky-scraper temple in Vrindavan. That feat was only outdone by Mira, The Mother of Auroville, who foresaw the landing of the Concorde in the fields of Tamil Nadu. They justify her too, and fantasize her being the Divine Mother.

I object. Raman Reti is the prove of the misuse. The mafia that is attracted to build equally impressive mansions there. And the Holy Dhams are destroyed five steps further by the progress of Kali Yuga thru this Walmart-place of worship. the elephants in Mayapur are disgrace in the face of the hunger present in India. But, right, it's just a zoo anyway, a place to go around and brag about big book-distributions all over the world.

Those ridiculous Samadhis are another proof of misuse. MEGALOMANIA screamed all over the place. And that is supposed to be holy.

Speaking of megalomania, Subal, who is a 1967-1974 first hand witness and close associate of Swamiji, has confirmed in his postings on this site what I have suspected already for many years - Swamiji was obsessed with showing off his preaching success in India, especially to his Godbrothers. That is why the temples in India had to be extra large. Is that really naiskarmya shuddha bhakti? Worth robbing people for?
And if all this 'devotional service' by these hoods was transcendental, beyond the law of karma, why did they all end up in jail?

Wow, Nabadip -

What can I say - your eyes are so wide open and your vision perfect. Not only that, but given your superior birth into the culturally rich European sub continent and my culturally deprived up bringing in the backwoods of California, I would guess that I am not even worthy of having a discussion with you.

Still, acknowledging my own obvious short-comings and venturing forth in the true American spirit of manifest destiny and conquering all foes with the backing of God and country - I would like to simply point out that large organizations are made up of people of great diversity and any attempt at categorizing them into simplistic over-reaching terms (much like your simplification of Americans and their lack of culture is over done stereotyping based on your own cultural up bringing) will necessarily be inaccurate at best as well as myopic. Oops, I forgot - your vision isn't clouded in any way.

Just to give you a little more information about me - I am not affiliated with Iskcon in any way whatsoever. I know quite a few devotees in that institution and I associate with some of them from time to time, but that's about it.

I appreciate the efforts of A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami and his courageous preaching campaign. How many devotees do you see leaving Vrndavana at such an advanced age to go to America virtually penniless to preach based on their faith? I am eternally indebted to him and I choose to see all the good that he did. I am well aware of many of the faults of Iskcon, both past and present, but I choose to focus on the good. Does that make me a 'blind follower'? Apparently to you it does, but then again, as I already said - I am not a member of Iskcon anyway so your critique of me missed it's mark considerably - although I will certainly be the first to admit that I have many faults.

If one wants to find faults with others it is not hard to do. That is one of the things that is the easiest to be expert in in kali yuga.

What ridiculous samdhis are you referring to? Did A.C. Bhaktivedanta spend money on samadhis? If he did, I am not aware of it. I am not familiar with the mansion you refer to at Raman Reti either.

Advaitadas - whatever the chip is that you have on your shoulder regarding A.C. Bhaktivedanta, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta or any other personality or institution that arose out of his preaching effort - I doubt very seriously that your continued search for justification of your position and ammunition for your verbal assault will lend itself to spiritual advancement. On the contrary, Mahaprabhu has called us to respect all living entities and expect none in return. It should be enough for you that you choose to distance yourself from that sanga.

The only reason I chose to post on this thread is because it could just as easily be titled the 'serious denigration of Iskcon and it's leader thread'.

I have seen the 'testimonials' - my basic comment to anyone is - why engage in something you don't agree with? If you did so, you are responsible. It is no use to pass the buck and blame the institution or it's founder. I was in Iskcon for awhile too back in the late 70's and very early 80's. I left and with good reason, but my own personal feeling is that it is more helpful for me to understand where I went wrong than it is for me to try to critique an entire organization or lay blame for my own short comings there. No, I didn't leave only because of my own short comings, and yes, I saw many things I didn't agree with and people I didn't want to be associated with. I also saw a lot of good things and many people that I am happy to have known and would keep close association with today if it were possible. Nothing is ever black and white and to try to over simplify such complex issues and organizations in order to assure yourself that your vision is 'clear' is what I would characterize as 'blind' or myopic. But, that's me - to each their own.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

As an American who lived in Europe for many years I must say this--Americans tend to see the world through a stray. Many people in Europe distrust Americans, but Americans can't figure out why. It is a fact that not only Navadwipa Das has this view of ISKCON but many others as well. I personally heard from the greatest book distributer of ISKCON, a European say, "Iskcon is the American society of devotee exploitation".


I agree it was something of great faith and courage for Bhaktivedanta Swami to leave India, go on a boat ride to a foreign country in an advanced age.

However, we should put things a bit into perspecttive. Swamiji left a life of voluntary poverty condition as a renunciate in Vrndavan to come to the west (to preach). I lived in Vrndavan for three years in the late 1990's. I'll be the first to admit it was a harsh life. Indoor shelter is not much relief from the cold winters and the blistering heat. The streets swell with sewage water during monsoon, so you're walking in knee deep sewage water. Monkeys harrass you. People harrass you. Mosquitos, disease, poor food, poor transportation, poor electrical facilities. It is a tough life. For someone born there I guess its nothing too it.

I also lived in New York's South Bronx during the 1960's. I'm sure it was not any better than the Bowery or the Lower East Side. Compared to India--the Bowery and Lower East Side was far superior to life in India.

Did Swamiji come to preach to the fallen in the Lower East Side? Eventually, but if you read his biography he came there after living in other areas, including Uptown Manhatten. He went there after living in the Upper Manhatten when he saw that there was a market for followers for Indian Swamis.

Another thing is that devotees may have this imagery that Bhaktivedanta Swami left the aprakata Vrndavan, the place where the dhama is resplendent with kalpa vrksa trees bearing heaving fruits, fat cows dripping milk, roads made of jewels, temples of gems, ect., to come and preach in the scumy streets of the Lower East Side to suffer the harsh New York life. I am sure it was harsh to him in the sense of no Krsna and no Vrndavan, but there was certainly better facilities that were not imaginable in India, what to speak of Vrndavan.

Speaking about samadhis, I wonder if any of the devotees who where responsible of constructing the samadhis of Bhaktivedanta Swami thought about the pros and cons of building a samadhi mandir taller than the samadhi mandirs of Sri Rupa, Sri Sanatan and SrI Raghunatha Das Goswami. They obviously thought he was bigger and better than them.

Was this Navina-nirada?

How do you know what people tought or think? You are one assuming machine, aren't you?

One should be careful about generalizing, but my experience in ISKCON has also been that Bhaktivedanta was viewed as much more important than everybody else, including Rupa, Sanatana, and even Caitanya himself.

Sincerely,
Elpis

I never heard of such a nonsense. How can anybody think that BS is more important than Rupa, Sanatan, what ot speak of Lord Caitanya. Many in Iskcon think BS is more important than any contemporary acarya, but not beyond that. That is the general mood I experienced there.

What can I say? Our experiences differ. But that does not necessarily make any of them "nonsense."

Yes. As a Christian, I am a progressive, seminary educated mainline protestant who has been taught to use critical thinking in my approach to God. I am in a denomination (UCC) that has no dogma and no hierarchy. After ISKCON, I considered joining a Catholic monastary because they have a strong spiritual tradition. However, I could not accept another pope and being told what I have to believe. ISKCON worship is similar to Catholic with the formal ritual performed in a foreign, dead language, although most Catholics now worship in the local language. I can see why Catholics are attracted.

I agree that it is best to approach God through a guru. That is why I became a disciple of Bhaktivedanta. I admired him and wanted to be like him so I followed him. In the same way we are to follow Jesus and become like Jesus. That may be protestant also. I don't know and don't care. As far as "those who claim to be devotees of Krishna are not actually so," both Bhaktivedanta and Lalita Prasad along with others had no problem claiming their devotee of Krishna status. Of course they also claim to be the servant of the servant of Krishna as do I. I don't see a contradiction. I do see false humility or perhaps a real lack of spiritual attainment on the part of those who always play the humbler than thou game. I wrote an article "Be Humbler Than a Balde of Grass" published in the April, 1981 "Brjabasi Spirit." I am a true believer in humility. I think humility is often much misunderstood. Of course, we are in the position we are in today thanks to the grace of Sri Guru, but when are we going to grow up and be adults able to think and make decisions for ourselves rather than being spiritual children?

The priests may think they are vicars of Christ, but I see them in ads on TV in their outrageous costumes from the 16th century at least, and I think "Who do they think they are? When and where do they think they are living?" I am sure Jesus never dressed like that or considered himself a prince of the church. Even many Catholics are starting to question priestly authority. So if you want to compare the Gaudiya approach to the Catholic approach, I'm not interested. However, I don't think vaishnavas like Lalita Prasad, Dr. Kapoor, Gaura Kishor Das Babaji, Jaganath Das Babaji, Vamsi Das Babaji and others were anything like Catholic priests. Maybe that's the problem with ISKCON and GM.

If you accept a guru, engage in devotional practices but do not aspire to have direct realization of God and become a guru yourself so that you can pass on the teachings, what are you doing? The guru's job is to lead us to Krishna consciousness, not to hold us back. If the guru has faults in certain areas, it is the job of a disciple to point them out for the benefit of other disciples and seekers just as many Catholic laity are pointing out the faults of their priests, bishops, archbishops and cardinals and calling for accountability and reform.

Why do we need to do things differently? Because it is April 1, 2004.

Your servant,
Subal Das

"One who sees the Supersoul in every living being and equal everywhere does not degrade himself by his mind. Thus he approaches the transcendental destination."


"For one who sees Me everywhere and sees everything in Me, I am never lost, nor is he ever lost to Me."

"Of all that is material and all that is spiritual in this world, know for certain that I am both its origin and dissolution. "

"O son of Prtha, those who are not deluded, the great souls, are under the protection of the divine nature. They are fully engaged in devotional service because they know Me as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, original and inexhaustible. "

"Always chanting My glories, endeavoring with great determination, bowing down before Me, these great souls perpetually worship Me with devotion. "

"O son of Kunti, all that you do, all that you eat, all that you offer and give away, as well as all austerities that you may perform, should be done as an offering unto Me. "

"In this way you will be freed from all reactions to good and evil deeds, and by this principle of renunciation you will be liberated and come to Me. "

"A person is said to be still further advanced when he regards all--the honest well-wisher, friends and enemies, the envious, the pious, the sinner and those who are indifferent and impartial--with an equal mind. "

"I envy no one, nor am I partial to anyone. I am equal to all. But whoever renders service unto Me in devotion is a friend, is in Me, and I am also a friend to him. "

"The Blessed Lord said: Fearlessness, purification of one's existence, cultivation of spiritual knowledge, charity, self-control, performance of sacrifice, study of the Vedas, austerity and simplicity; nonviolence, truthfulness, freedom from anger; renunciation, tranquility, aversion to faultfinding, compassion and freedom from covetousness; gentleness, modesty and steady determination; vigor, forgiveness, fortitude, cleanliness, freedom from envy and the passion for honor--these transcendental qualities, O son of Bharata, belong to godly men endowed with divine nature. "

"Arrogance, pride, anger, conceit, harshness and ignorance--these qualities belong to those of demoniac nature, O son of Prtha. "

"All of them--as they surrender unto Me--I reward accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha."

I was inititated by Bhaktivedanta in San Francisco, February, 1967. The movement was very small then, a temple in NY and one in SF, both in storefronts. I consider Bhaktivedanta to be very pure at that time. He went to the West following the order of his guru with little hope of success in creating devotees. He was humble, spiritual, had a presence that could fill the room and spoke teachings that made sense even to a hippie with authority. He totally won me over. I knew him intimately and lived with him as his personal assistant for a couple of months in 1968.

During that time, in LA, a reporter from Life magazine came, did an interview and took some pictures. An article was published profiling leading gurus of the day such as Bhaktivedanta, Maharishi, Guru Maharaj Ji, etc.. I think that's when Bhaktivedanta got the idea that he wanted to be the greatest guru in the world and to do that he had to be the greatest guru in India. He showed off his Western disciples in India and called us his "dancing dogs" or "dancing white elephants."

By 1974, his success surpassed his wildest dreams. Yes, I believe he suffered from meglomania. He certainly seemed like a different person than I first met. The corruption of ISKCON surpassed my greatest fears. I thought, it took the church hundreds of years to get so big and corrupt. We did it in just eight. How wonderful. I left in disgust along with others to begin a new life.

Question authority,
Subal

Looks like we have some cultural incompatibility here ! Forgive me if I am amused.

Audarya,
thank you for ignoring me!

shows me the way!

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Regardless of ones disciplic line our focus should be very simple: to cultivate the desire to serve the Vaisnavas and Sri Radhika. If something will help cultivate that mood then we utilize it; if it serves to distract us from this goal we reject it. Philosophical, ethical, moral, social and personal issues are a fact of life but the manner in which we chose to react in such situations has an incredible impact on our lives and the lives of others. When interacting with one another we need to consider how our words, and the emotions they bring about, influence our ultimate desire to serve the Vaisnavas and Sri Radhika as well as how our words will effect the other parties desire to serve the Vaisnavas and Sri Radhika. If they do not bring us and those we associate with closer to the service of Guru and Sri Radhika than what is the use?

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

I am sorry Tarunkishor - I guess since you answered your own questions on my behalf I felt there wasn't much for me to respond to. You are correct, I don't find anything wrong with my guru's instructions to me and I do see that they are supported by sadhu and sastra.

I'm not so sure about the offender label - I know that many people feel that way. It may be the manner of saying things more than what is being said. I feel it is more our own intentions that tend to be either offensive or not so. Having a difference of opinion is certainly not offensive - stating it in such a way as to belittle the one who holds a different one and insinuating that the other person is off, brainwashed, myopic, idiotic, simplistic, cult-like or any other such thing could certainly be construed as offensive.

As an example I may state that I disagree with such and such a person on some particular point and the reasons why I disagree - that is certainly not offensive. But if I employ derogatory language, name calling or any other such rhetorical devices meant to prove my stance merely on the basis of character assasination - that would be offensive and uncalled for.

Anyway the whole idea of offensiveness is much simpler than most people make it out to be - as I said above, it is really about one's inner intentions and the feelings behind what is being said.

The gaudiya vaishnava world has many varied personalities in it and everyone who is involved, including myself, should learn to be sensitive to each individual's feelings and not denigrate others revered guides. Such acts are like denigrating another persons intimate friends or family members and expecting them not to take offense to it.

Subal - thank you for your thoughtful reply. I agree with much of what you said. We should be progressive and it is a good thing to question authority. I am not Catholic, but I can't agree with you that just because you find the dress of a priest to be unfashionable or out of date that it must be changed. I also can't agree with your generalization regarding Catholic priests. Since my wife is Catholic I have had the opportunity to know quite a few of them on very intimate terms and I can assure you that they are all uniquely individual.

I wasn't suggesting that Iskcon or GM are similar to Catholics and that those outside those institutions are not. I wasn't really talking about institutions in my comparison - I was talking about the general approach to God. Since you went to seminary I am sure you are much more educated regarding the protestant reformation, but I think you captured what I have always thought was the basic jist of it, the approach to God is personal and no intercession from anyone else is necessary and in fact - reliance on such intercession may serve as a genuine barrier. That is basically the antithesis of Gaudiya vaishnavism. Given your background I am sure your aware of that already so no need to belabor the point.

I agree with your point about what the goal is, just how we get there seems to be a point of contention between us - though it may be more semantics than anything.
If the guru is a barrier to your progress you either have a bad guide or you are not a very adept student, since as you pointed out - the guru's role is to bring you to Krsna consciousness. If both guru and disciple are genuine then the disciple will become a competent guide for others. The role of guru is to make gurus, not disciples - at least that's one way of stating what you already have.

I am glad to hear that you had the good fortune to be intimately associated with A.C. Bhaktivedanta. You are very fortunate. I am sure you won't mind that I strongly disagree with your assessment of him, however. I find it to be a bit presumptuous on your part to suggest that you have ascertained his inner motivations and that it was all about position and personal aggrandizement. There of course were many other thoughtful disciples of his who had more intimate association with him over a longer period of time and they came to quite a different conclusion about him and his inner aspirations and motivation.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

Beautifully put.

And I know your Gurudev is one of those, and I myself personally witnessed the devotional mood of Tripurari Swami in the crazy days of 1973, and how he was single-pointed in his devotion to Guru-Gauranga. I remember him in Sydney and with Prabhupada, and I remember how we were all following Prabhpada who was dancing in front of the Ratha of Jagannatha through the streets of Melbourne.

All glory to Tripurari Swami

All glory to His Divine Grace Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, too.

namah om visnupadaya krsna-presthaya bhutale
swami sri bhaktivedanta prabhupadaya te namah
gurvajnam sirasi-dharyam saktyavesa sva-rupine
hare-krsneti mantrena pascatya-pracya-tarine
visvacarya prabaryaya divya karunya murtaye
sri bhagavata-madhurya-gita-jnana-pradayine
gaura-sri-rupa-siddhanta-sarasvati nisevine
radha-krsna-padambhoja-bhrngaya gurave namah

I repeat, humbly and not in a challenging mood, I admire the capacity to justify in the face of so much evidence. It is certainly a special quality to remain blind to defeating facts, and still remain smiling and act as though nothing had happened. I admire that. I with my polluted heart see the Fascism-promoting side of it. What can I do? I do not know whether after anartha-nivriti I would start to see it as all-wonderful, too, just see Krishna everywhere, even where vaishnavas are blasphemed in spiritual books. I wish you well, Audaryia-lila das and all others, Murali das praising the inventor of the destructive path of book-throwing-away. I wish I had your vision. Sure makes YOU happy, even if it hurts the humble simple vaishnavas in their bhajan-kutirs. (It does not hurt them in the sense that they would notice, but it violates their dignity and transcendental greatness. And that up all the pranali lines to The Source. And you think Mahaprabhu is served by that?)
Jai Nitai. JOY Nitai.

This is so wrong.

I remember how you were so eager to get to the top of the hierachy and be a big sannyasi maharaja. So eager, willy.

good point.

so many people questioned me about the samadhis...
millions of dollars thrown out ...and the poor still die hungry!
oh no, sorry, the mass distribution of kicchari. i heard they only used the best vegetables.
like FOOD FOR LIFE in Germany. go to the big market, get half-rotten crappy veggies and make prasadam. i used to cook tons of it in Heidelberg.
i felt ashamed always.

and the mayapur temple? the biggest temple in the world.
ridiculous.
suddha-bhakti,huh?
what has this to do with the highest goal in life,prema-bhakti?
who cares about the temple dome in the height of 200 metres?
just aishvarya, nothing more.

thanks Audarya-lila das.
you are very nice and educated and you can bring down the words more easier than me.
but still i am on the side of Nawadvip das.
how can you actually be accepting all that things that happened?
yes, i admire your faith in your Guru.
but how can you just close your eyes from all the issues we so often discussed?

i loved AC Bhaktivedanta Swami.
i liked Harikesa Swami.

but all this misrepresented information, the incoherent, concocted philosophy and the suppressing of all these misdealings in the name of spirituality...
my heart was broken and shattered to pieces.

like Radhapda das said, i also was on the verge of throwing away my studies to become a teacher.
everyone told me thats MAYA. i was disgusted by their stupid point of view.
had i done it, i would be off selling paintings or books...great.

for me, the main problem is the parampara-issue and the many philosophical "wrongs" or lets say concoctions.
that people will do mistakes, thats normal. but i was told the "infallible"-story of the MEGA-Guru....

i remember very well the beautiful league of these glorious swamis, lining up in the nineties on our German farm. everyone wanted to be the king. but Harikesa ruled. one time i was serving sumptuous maha-prasadam to the kings down in their basement. yo, man. so much prasadam for sannyasis? i felt like in the wrong movie...

and sannyasis with own houses, cars, servants, boats, Toshiba laptops for 5000 US... whereas their "disciples" lived and stilllive in poverty, donating their last underwear!

yeah, yukta-vairagya. nicely put in the name of hidden sense-gratication.

i am happy for the souls who still feel comfortable in this line of spirituality.
but i cannot buy it anymore.

and please, dont bring up the sentimental point of the Swami who came with nothing to the great land... i am sick with this justification.
everyone has admiration for this wonderful achievement of AC Bhaktivedanta.
but its no argument for justification.
it should invoke a feeling of guilt, huh? nope, no more.
i will always respect ACBVS, but that doesnt mean that i will accept all he said, did or wrote.

and it is OK to speak about doubts or about untruths, concoctions,etc...

and remember: mostly people from the Saraswati-lineage come here to start discussions about hot issues. and , what wonder, someone speaks about his experiences (Advaita, Subal, Radhapada,..) and BANG, we are all offenders and sahajiyas.

yeah, rock´n roll.

Tarunji

Well, some are openly preaching along those lines. I suggest you read this article as a good example.

Prapannamrta Tarpana? Whats that? Written by Atmatattva Das? Well, a fine link Madhava. Good stuff for showcasing the Greatest Examples of Bhaktivedanta Megalomania - For 10,000 years.....I singlehandedly.............fools and rascals..........my envious Godbrothers...............Golden Age.....

dhaaa

i cant believe this....

yeah, Bho..s.




thanks, Madhava.
here we have the point.
"utility is the principle" as the essence of esoteric knowledge.

i remember the following:

Everyone, please try to limit your comments aimed directly at evaluating the other participants in the discussion to a minimum to keep this already sensitive topic from exploding.

Prapannamrta tarpana. Ah right, by Ramanuja Acarya. It seems Atma Tattva Das is also belonging to another sampradaya, the Sri Sampradaya, like our friend Murali. How they all ended up on this site I wonder?

Someone find me the 'book distribution yajna' in the Gosvamis books please?

I have tried to deal with the inherent contradiction in guru-tattva and the reality of his humanity and the possibility of mistakes. The essence is "take the essence." If the essence is important to you, then that person is still guru in some way, shape or form. That means that God has appeared to you in that person and therefore must be recognized.

The implications of our gurus' moral failings.

There is a dead link to an article by Hare Krishna Das in the above, so I have published it in the Editorials section.

I have just reread the above article, and I hope that anyone who reads it will look through it carefully, as there are a number of quite different points covered. I am obviously not interested in discussing the "three books" issue. I have said everything I intend to say on that issue. The main point I am trying to make is how to deal with the problem of "imperfections in the guru." Though this particular article is connected to Bhaktivinoda Thakur, I think there are principles that can and should be applied to Bhaktivedanta Swami also.

Is this an example of a Bhakti Terrorist 'Suicide Bomber' Kamakazi Pilot-ISKCON Branch?


-----------------------------------------------

Lord Nityananda Delivers
the Mrgari of Southern Idaho
By Sri Hari Dasa,
Boise, Idaho
Posted April 1, 2004 (dipika.org)

Recently, I had a wonderful experience, the kind that book distributors talk about all the time. It had never happened to me, and I had always wondered how these devotees preach so that people feel inspired to take so many books.

It was a nice, sunny, and beautiful springlike day. People were busy in their own fun plans. Some people were with their groups getting ready to enter restaurant for lunch, and others were waiting outside for their mates to arrive. Some were enjoying the sunny lounges of bars and restaurants. The whole area was filled with the smell of roasted meat, garlic, etc.

After struggling for about an hour in the downtown area of Boise, Idaho, with not much success, we decided to visit the parking lot of a store. After parking our car, we started looking for opportunities. My son Aja Govinda, being active and enthusiastic, immediately started asking people without caring about the results. He would meet one after the other, showing Bhagavad Gita, making a presentation using the photo plates in the middle. He talked to dozens of people with mixed results.

On the other hand, I was watching him doing his book distribution. A long time back, Hrdyananda Maharaj had visited Boise with his secretary, Daruka Prabhu. I told Daruka Prabhu that we generally visit the homes of members of the Indian community and offer them maha-prasada and books. Daruka Prabhu said that this was good but that we should also go out and distribute books on the streets because this is the only way one can learn to become humble and quickly learn to surrender to Krishna. At that time I was very much afraid of confronting contaminated, inimical, and demoniac people on sankirtana.

After taking a deep breath and thus gathering all my remaining energy and enthusiasm, I decided to become an instrument in the sankirtana movement of Srila Prabhupada.

"O Lord Nityananda," I prayed, "it appears outwardly that I am distributing these books, but actually You are the One who has already decided who is going to get Your causeless mercy. I am very happy and fortunate that You have allowed me to become a tool in Your plans."

As I entered the parking lot, I saw a shopping cart full of wines and meat products. Behind the cart, was a tall, handsome, and strong-looking cowboy. He was getting close to his expensive BMW to put the stuff into the trunk.

I looked at him.

"What's up?" he said.

"I have some books to share with you on living a natural life based on the land and the cow," I answered.

Thanks a lot for saying that," he said. "I live a life that is fully based on the land and the cow. I grow grain on the land and feed it to the cows to make money by selling beef. This is how I earn my livelihood."

"We are a vegetarian animal like the cow," I said. "When we feed non-veg to the cows they get mad cow disease, and when we feed ourselves with non-veg, we get Alzheimer's disease, like mad cow disease. We lose our memory because our brains become like sponges. We should drink milk. Milk is brain food, as it develops the finer brain tissues, and we should avoid meat. The cow is already transforming her blood into milk and giving all the nutrition to the brain and the body. Why kill her?"

"But I see no difference in killing a plant or an animal for food," he said.

"Yes," I said, "it is true, but we do not kill plants. They give us their produce willingly as per nature's arrangement, as the cow gives us milk, like our mother."

I showed him The Higher Taste and read the page on the hidden cost of meat.

He was unfazed. "But I live on beef farming," he said. "I understand all your arguments about environmental degradation, erosion, health, protein, pollution, mad cow disease, the hidden cost of meat, and everything else. But what will I do if I give it up? How can I earn my livelihood?"

"Sell vegetables, grains, and milk," I said. "Don't spend money on wine and tobacco. You will not die if you don't have these things. Rather, you will die early if you consume all this unnecessary stuff. Look at the other side of coin. Consider this way of natural living. Please take one of these books."

I gave up and fell silent. I felt that all my energy had been used up on just one person during the last half hour. "But," I thought, "at least he listened to the message of Lord Nityananda and chanted the Mahamantra once on my request."

He opened his car door and sat down on the driver's seat, his legs hanging out.

"Just take this Higher Taste book and give me even fifty cents," I said, "or take it free if you do not want to pay, but please read this book. It will change your life."

I began to pray silently: "O Lord Nityananda, I am here doing my best and asking this person. Now you decide whether this man will receive your causeless mercy or not. You are famous for delivering Jagai and Madhai. Give Your mercy to this Mrgrari and show him the path that leads to You. Please change his heart."

The man looked up and tried to see into my eyes but could not because of the huge cowboy hat. Then he took off the hat. "I do not know what to say to you as you have defeated all my arguments," he said. "I will not take just a single book but I want a copy of all the books you have."

It took me about twenty seconds to recover from the ecstasy, which I could not hide from him. Then he asked me many more questions as we exchanged cards. I told him that I have a PhD in hydrology and environmental engineering and I deal with the degradation of the air and water quality due to feedlots and slaughterhouses, all causing many incurable diseases. He left me with a promise to invite me to his ranch to speak to his fellow farmers.

After this, I got new enthusiasm and energy, and I felt like I had become a 16-year-old boy like my son Aja Govinda. O Lord Nityananda, now I know why these book-distributors roam on the streets of the whole world, and how they maintain their energy and enthusiasm.

Sri Hari Dasa,
Boise, Idaho, USA
Sudhir_goyal@hotmail.com

I don't know why you should associate this particular article with "Terrorist." This is, I think, an instance of book distribution in a devotional spirit. It was done with honesty, not dissimulation. The devotee did not present himself as something he was not, nor his books as something they were not. He did not use anything other than legitimate means to convince the other person--prayer and conversation. So, how can I or anyone else who values vegetarianism or devotional service not be delighted with his adventure?

Let's hope the recipient of the books is not let down by them.

There is only one thing that strikes me with wonder again and again. The followers of Iskcon/GM repeatedly warn us not to criticize their leaders, because it is an offence. But I wonder if they feel the same when reading Bhaktivedanta Swami criticizing practically everyone (karmis, meat-eaters, mayavadis, Buddhists, Christians, impersonalists, yogis, sahajiyas, Gaudiya Math, scientists etc etc). Or when reading Sridhar Maharaja calling the babajis at Radha-kund imitiators and "lake-thieves". Or when reading Narayan Maharaja's boycott-lecture.

So the Iskcon/GM version of Vaisnava etiquette seems to be the following: Gaudiya Math and Iskcon gurus CAN criticize and slander others, but others CANNOT criticize them, because it is offensive. Please let us also know the references from the Shastra stating that Vaisnava-aparadh can only be committed against Iskcon/GM leaders, all the other Vaisnavas (e.g. the "lake-thieves") can be criticized freely. Thank you in advance.

I am very sorry but many devotees could not and cannot accept this kind of dictatorship: "Our guru can call your gurus bogus rascals, but don't you dare to say the same about our guru or we kill you, offender!" Next step is atomic bomb and shooting down those who disagree with us (as it already had happened in some cases).

On the other day I read a post on Audarya saying that "Prabhupada had the right to criticize, because he was a pure devotee. Others cannot do that." No comment.


So I am personally very grateful that some nice devotees had drawn the attention to the disadvantages of criticizing, but please, forward this noble message to Iskcon and Gaudiya Math leaders and members, too.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I do agree with you on this point. One of the main “cracks” in my faith in ISKCON was in ACBSP’s seemingly aggressive style. I get that same feeling when I encounter any other devotes who seemingly “throw rocks” with no concern with who they hit EVEN IF they are correct in their words. Quiet simply you may not just defeat someone in an argument but you may end their aspirations in devotional life. I have seen ISKCON do it; I have seen the GM do it and unfortunately I see some on this board also taking the liberty to attempt do it. It is sad.

I have made it a point in my life to try to associate with those who feel secure in their devotional lives as they are less likely to be in “attack” mode. This isn’t meant as a judgment on ACBSP, BSST or anyone on this board; it is simply a gut feeling I have. I truly want to develop a soft heart and an appreciation for the aspiring devotees and the sadhikas regardless of where their allegiance or intelligence leads them as they are still aspiring Vaisnavas. I believe you can do that and still assimilate who is on the correct path or is the most advanced without having to make the faults of others a focus. I will simply follow those I feel are best situated and offer a distant respect to those I feel aren’t the best situated.

I made this same point to K when he frequented this site: Do your words please your Guru? Is this the mood and attitude that your Guru wants you to showcase and associate with other aspiring Vaisnavas with? Do these words and arguments soften ones heart and help qualify one for the service of Sri Radhika?

If this distracts us from these aspects of our devotional lives then they should cease. If something will help cultivate that mood then we utilize it; if it serves to distract us from this goal we reject it. Again philosophical, ethical, moral, social and personal issues are a fact of life but the manner in which we chose to react in such situations has an incredible impact on our lives and the lives of others. We can discriminate between those we agree with and those we don’t and even offer points as to why what someone is doing is harmful. However it comes to a point we need to consider how our words, and the emotions they bring about, influence our ultimate desire to serve the Vaisnavas and Sri Radhika as well as how our words will effect the other parties desire to serve the Vaisnavas and Sri Radhika. Again I ask you if they do not bring us and those we associate with closer to the service of Guru and Sri Radhika than what is the use?

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Jagat – thanks for the link. Very fitting.

sorry for the double entry

[quote=Audarya-lila dasa,Apr 2 2004, 06:20 AM] [QUOTE=TarunKishordas,Apr 2 2004, 04:59 AM]
Subal - thank you for your thoughtful reply. I agree with much of what you said. We should be progressive and it is a good thing to question authority. I am not Catholic, but I can't agree with you that just because you find the dress of a priest to be unfashionable or out of date that it must be changed. I also can't agree with your generalization regarding Catholic priests. Since my wife is Catholic I have had the opportunity to know quite a few of them on very intimate terms and I can assure you that they are all uniquely individual.

I wasn't suggesting that Iskcon or GM are similar to Catholics and that those outside those institutions are not. I wasn't really talking about institutions in my comparison - I was talking about the general approach to God. Since you went to seminary I am sure you are much more educated regarding the protestant reformation, but I think you captured what I have always thought was the basic jist of it, the approach to God is personal and no intercession from anyone else is necessary and in fact - reliance on such intercession may serve as a genuine barrier. That is basically the antithesis of Gaudiya vaishnavism. Given your background I am sure your aware of that already so no need to belabor the point.

I agree with your point about what the goal is, just how we get there seems to be a point of contention between us - though it may be more semantics than anything.
If the guru is a barrier to your progress you either have a bad guide or you are not a very adept student, since as you pointed out - the guru's role is to bring you to Krsna consciousness. If both guru and disciple are genuine then the disciple will become a competent guide for others. The role of guru is to make gurus, not disciples - at least that's one way of stating what you already have.

I am glad to hear that you had the good fortune to be intimately associated with A.C. Bhaktivedanta. You are very fortunate. I am sure you won't mind that I strongly disagree with your assessment of him, however. I find it to be a bit presumptuous on your part to suggest that you have ascertained his inner motivations and that it was all about position and personal aggrandizement. There of course were many other thoughtful disciples of his who had more intimate association with him over a longer period of time and they came to quite a different conclusion about him and his inner aspirations and motivation.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa [/quote]
Please do not get me wrong. I also studied at Catholic seminaries where we had cross registration and appreciate their spirituality, I admire many Catholics who have even sacrificed their lives for the sake of justice such as Bishop Romero, I have had Catholic spiritual directors, have been friends with Catholic priests, still work with Catholics and am married to a recovering Catholic. I was particularly referring to those who dress up in embroidered silk and gold trimmed vestments with thier crowns and staffs, all pompous and holier than thou. I just think "Come on. Get over it." It is not so much that that dress is unfashionable or out of date, but what are they saying by dressing like that. I've seen dieties not as opulantly dressed. I think it's pretenteous.

Let me give an example in regard to guru and disciple. When I met Bhaktivedanta Swami, I was thirsting for spiritual teachings and he provided them. I advanced nicely under his guidance. However, there reached a point where I wanted to go further. He and his organization were holding me back. I did not like the direction ISKCON was going and felt he approved of it. I finally decided the goals of my guru and ISKCON were not compatible with my goal of spiritual advancement. I left after long, deep consideration and it was a crushing blow to me which I am still recovering from thirty years later. However, I feel like I graduated from ISKCON and went on with my spiritual growth in new ways. I actually believe Bhaktivedanta brought me to where I was in my previous incarnation spiritually, and I have been progressing from there. The problem is my heart has been poisoned by love of Radha Krishna and I cannot get over it.

I do not claim that Bhaktivedanta's motivations were "all about position and personal aggrandizement." Of course he had much higher motivations which were his main driving force. However, power corrupts and he had absolute power in ISKCON. I forgive him for the pain he caused me. I give thanks for the blissful spiritual experiences he gave me which continue still. He did the best he could as I hope we all are.

Your servant,
Subal Das

Okay, Muralidhar das, lets talk about it. How is this so wrong?

Because I have some history with Sri Sridhar Maharaja?

Maybe you can tell me, how you live with Sridhar Maharaja's repeated mentioning of the sahajiyas, and hope to attain your goal while repeating such derogatory talk of other, great, vaishnavas?

Let me just tell you what my unimportant experience in this field was. When I first came to Sri Nabadwip Dham, to Kolerdanga, to Sri Sridhar Maharaja, the great personality, the great bhakta that he was, I sometimes got to hear him talk about the sahajiyas. At that time I had an image of a sahajiya being a dirty kind of person; so whenever I rode a Riksha downtown to Paromatola, and I saw some muddy little road-side temple, I thought, those are the sahajiyas. Later, once an American Swami Maharaj disciple, who chanted the Mahamantra all day, came and asked: "Is there a place in Nabadwip where they chant the Holy Name day and night" , to which Sridhar Maharaja answered: "Well, the Sahajiyas do that, but seva is more important than chanting". When I heard that, my picture of a sahajiya become a few steps more dignified. But I still continued to think of them as people sitting around a fire and chanting wildly or so. When I heard some loudspeaker chanting going on day and night, i thought maybe that's them.

This strange picture continued to haunt me, until much later, when I was once in Puri in the marble guest house of the local CS Math. My friends from Germany told me: "there is a really nice gentleman coming every evening, we have nice talks on bhakti and other topics". I asked a little more about him, until they said: "Well he is a sahajiya". I then found out that he is belonging to Sri Radharamandas Babaji's following there at Haridas Thakur's Samadhi. My picture of the dirty sahajiyas was severely shattered. First by the really nice gentleman, then by his affiliation, because I had been there frequently, and I had seen those were nice bhaktas.

It still took a while to sink in. I got a whole new vision of the reality of the Holy Dham once that I took the step to experience a Sri Gaur-Purnima, not fenced in by some Math, but out in the open at the Ganga. I saw how all these people, thousands and thousands, came and passed by, and they were all vaishnavas of some kind. Then also these small little groups passed along the road with their banners and flags, each Gaudiya Math association presenting itself as the one big thing, the real thing, next to the nothing of everyone else. Maybe that's a wrong insinuation by me here, but it looked like that at that time. And I remember what "our" talk was like when I was part of one of these factions. I saw the big picture, and got a whole new vision of the celebration going on in all kinds of different places, showing their heartfelt devotion to Sri Gauranga at his birthday celebration.

What I'd like that would show thru in this small narration of mine here, is that there occurred in me, over the years, a widening of consciousness. For everyone else here reading this, it may be nothing, or they had that vision long ago or whatever, but for me, this ignorant being that I am, that was my slow process of an eye-opening.

I left out Govinda Maharaja's stories about Radhakund and how dangerous it was to go there according to his words. There were a lot more strange stories that I witnessed with those bhaktas to whom you, Muralidhar das, still count yourself in most reverential and humble, and fervently defending ways. That is up to you, and your right to do.

I am just telling you where I am coming from. Now I would be interested to hear you (remember, we were once friends!) how you live with what you know and have experienced in this regard. You have heard the same words about sahajiyas, and probably still hear them from the tapes that were recorded back then. I did not have the facility of the Internet and a website to discover and discuss before my change of heart happened, so I do not know what that is like. I am curious.

Joy Nitai.

This is sooooo sweet. I would encourage everyone, at this point, write their own book. These stories are breathtaking, honest.

Harinamananda in 2000, post Harikesh era.

No, I am not. My former next door neighbor is an Iskconite. I was having a discussion with him about the teachings of the Goswamis. At one point he got disturbed about the contradictions between Bhaktivedanta's teachings and the teachings of the Goswamis. He slammed his hand down on the Bhagavata shouting emphatically, "Prabhupada is greater than all the other acaryas, Rupa Goswami and everyone! He's greater than all of them!"

I also heard Rameshvara Swami saying this in a taped lecture in LA in 1978. Only he went to America and that makes him the greatest acarya of all time.....

I used to hear my temple president in the early 1980's often quote this one incident when Bhaktivedanta was being interviewed by a news reporter and someone asked him why is he riding in a Mercedes Benc. Bhaktivedanta was said to have responded, "The spiritual master should be riding in a car made of gold."

He would also share with us his observance of Kirtananda's birthday party in New Vrndavan 23 years ago . Kirtananda would be served a silver plate with small silver bowls covered. He would open them and see stacks of $50 and $100 dollar bills and say, "Looks yummy."

The point is that the sannyasis and gurus of Iskcon did not invent a high standard of living for themselves, it came from the top. This is contrary to the lives of the followers of Sri Caitanya who accepted a life of tapasya to engage in bhajan.

I remember that reading that same interview very well. Bhaktivedanta Swami's rationale for riding in a Benz was along the lines of "the guru should be respected as God, therefore Krsna drives in a golden chariot and this Benz is simply tin and rubber." It was simply a joke which drew laughter in response. Personally I thought that the question itself was rather presumptuous.

It was certainly not a materialistic desire on his part to drive in a Benz. Unfortunately I cannot say the same for his successors.

I think it's safe to say it was at least partly a joke. He sometimes responded to questions that seemed silly in a jocular fashion, often a joke at the reporter's expense, and they seemed not to get it. And neither, I think, did many of us. When he was asked about shaving heads by a reporter who demonstrated some femininst sensibilities, he made a crack about shaving legs. Unfortunately, many of his followers took the wrong message from these jokes.

I know that when he came to Hawaii in the '60s and early '70s, he seemed quite comfortable in Goursundar's pickup trucks. I also remember seeing his clothes hanging on the line behind the temple we had in Moanalua Valley (Subal remembers this place) in '74, and there were holes in them. And he wore cheap canvas slip-ons from Thom McCan or Kinney's that were also quite worn. Devotees would give him expensive watches, and he'd take off the fancy band and replace it with a Speidel Twist-o-Flex. Then he'd give the watch away a couple of weeks later.

Let's see - if two people in an institution of, say 10,000 or so, say something - especially something so outlandish - shall we then conclude that it is representative of the thinking within that institution? In 1978 Ramesvara had been involved with gaudiya vaishnavism for how long? Maybe 8 years? I only met him once and I tried to stay as far away from him as I could because he was such an obviously overbearing person. He left Iskcon sometime back in the 80's - probably not a very good example to use if you want to insinuate that his views are representative of the institution or even of any of it's leading memebers.

Nabadip - I know you didn't address your question about sahajiyas to me, but I would like to share with you what I have always thought. I never got the same impressions that you have - some dirty people, or some crazy fellows etc. My impression with the way the word was used by Sridhara Maharaja was that a sahajiya was a very normal person and that in the context that the term was being used, probably all sorts of people fit the bill from the very cultured and gentlemanly to the very uncultured folks like us Americans. My idea and what I gathered from reading various discourses was that the term was used as a synonym for pretender and, to be even more specific, he used it to characterize anyone who jumped to the highest stage without first completing the earlier stages. His estimation was that it was all pretense. He gave the analogy of the ripened fruit at the top of a tree - in order to get it, one must first climb the tree.

But the critique given by Sridhara Maharaja and his guide was not only leveled at those who fashion themselves as raganugas, they were just as adamant about all sadhakas - that they be honest with themselves and others and know their own place and honestly try to advance from where they are at. As you know Sridhara Maharaja spoke of imitation in regard to nama bhajana as well and that critique is certainly applicable to all sadhakas regardless of what level of attainment they may have achieved or think they have achieved. When people complained about Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's dipiction in an exhibit of a Brahmin using a Salagrama sila as a nutcracker (obviously meant as a critique of those whose worship is only meant to fill their belly), he put vaishnava tilak on the man showing that the critique was not meant as a knock on a particular group, but rather a universal principle was being elucidated.

Anyway, the topic is big and most people who visit this board don't agree with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's critique - but I believe they should at least understand it properly. Anyone who has a descent education can read about Krsna and his pastimes and they can also read about the various gradations of devotion and devotional service. Because there is a natural tendency in anyone to want the highest thing, if someone is attracted to Krsna they will naturally gravitate mentally toward Vrndavana and the Lord's initmate pastimes in particular. But 'going there' mentally is quite different than going there spiritually. If one wants to enter Vrndavana they will first have to purify themselves of material desires - that is the characteristic of the inhabitants there - kalpa vrksa trees and kamadenu cows and all facilities for enjoyment are there, but the residents don't want anything other than Krsna. When a person can chant Krsna nama will full attention and not be distracted they are making genuine progress. There are so many stages to pass through before we can actually enter the spiritual domain - that was the critique and it wasn't leveled at anyone in particular, but rather at every practicioner who is serious about the goal they desire.

This discussion is pretty much useless here though - as I said you don't agree with the critique, whereas those in their lineage obviously do. I personally don't believe there is such a wide gulf of differences between the disparate groups - afterall, we share the same ideal. We disagree over some details, but when you look at it from a distance and think about it carefully without being bogged down by emotional bias - at least when I perform such an exercise - the differences melt away and are not at all meaningful.

Do you know the story which was told in the book published by Sudhira Maharaja, Sri Guru and His Grace, where Bimal Prasad pays obeisances from a distance to Bhaktivinoda who is sitting on his veranda with another gentleman and the gentleman says - oh such a nice boy, but why is he paying obeisance from such a distance and Bhaktivinoda Thakur chuckles and informs his guest that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta had vowed not to come within 100 feet of a sahajiya. The thing that always struck me about this episode was the difference between Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta. They both repesent the same truth, but they behave differently - one was very accomodating and engaging - the other uncompromising and exclusionary. Who was right? I believe they both were.

I personally believe that we are all part of the same family and that, if we open up a bit, we all have something to learn from each other.

Anyway - got to get some work done.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

Kshamabuddhi is watching the goings on in this thread. I got a great laugh out of this picture. Who knows what the hell he's thinking? Obviously he doesn't know what to do with his time. It will probably come down in a day or two, but for as long as it is there, dig it.

(One's enough!)

It has come to stay... [ This image was posted on the top of Ksamabuddhi's website on April 2rd, 2004. ]

I have heard other ISKCON leaders say this as well.

Dear Audarya,

Do you think Iskcon is in need of reform?

Do you think reform is possible?

I know that your guru still has some hope, and Lord knows I wish I could believe it, but I don't. I see that in our local temple, they would rather stifle the life out of devotion rather than admit that they need help. Everything is there in Prabhupada's books--except for the answers to the questions that the books themselves raise in one's mind. Since no one has the answers, silence to the death is the only way to go. Otherwise they have to admit that there is some inadequacy. Every time I go to the temple, there are two different brahmacharis living there. They usually hang out long enough to take initiation from Bhakta Marga or someone and then they leave to be replaced by two other kids off the street.

There may be some temples in North America that still have a vibrant spiritual culture, but they seem to be the exception rather than the rule.

There was a couple of years ago, when Garuda was up and going through its vibrant phase, a group on PAMHO.NET called VAST, "Vaishnava Advanced Studies something." Most of Iskcon's scholars, including Hridayananda, Garuda, Tamala, Satyaraj, Rupa Vilasa, Brahma Tirtha, Advaita Prabhu Das, Drutakarma, and many others were on it. Some lively discussions were started, with those on Iskcon's periphery making a lot of pointed criticisms like those we are seeing here. Naturally, there was a lot of reaction, such as the following articles (both from the infamous GHQ): Change Prabhupada's Sexist Books and In Defence of Srila Prabhupada.

Discussion of scientific issues was quickly stifled by Drutakarma, who took it upon himself to uphold the Iskcon orthodoxy, no doubt having been appointed to do so by someone or another. VAST quickly shrunk to become rather NARROW.

Another example of something that was at first a sign of hope wasBurke Rochford's Centennial Survey, which Kundali kindly reviewed on VNN. Unfortunately, it was not widely circulated and produced little in the way of action. A typically bureaucratic action: commission a survey and do nothing about it.

Some positive lights are Iskcon Communications Journal, though it is still somewhat thin on effective scholarship, and Satyaraj's Journal of Vaishnava Studies, which thanks to his persistence has won a solid place in the scholarly community, and now even has support from those within Iskcon who have learned to stop fearing this kind of scholarly investigation of spiritual matters. I name Garuda Das specifically.

Anyway, my point is this: I am not against Iskcon, nor do I think that we need to be or should be. As a matter of fact, I am so outside Iskcon that I really don't feel that I have to define myself in relation to it. However, clearly, one cannot be a follower of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu without entering into some contact with representatives of Iskcon. This site is a perfect example.

On the other hand, I personally feel affection for Iskcon and am greatly disappointed that it has failed me as a community that more clearly reflects what I idealize as Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's bhakti movement. But I am quite happy to have discovered a living bhakti tradition outside Iskcon and the Gaudiya Math in which I feel a greater amount of personal freedom, and which I feel more truly reflects its original ideals.

I've got to move on right now, but this is something I will return to.

I was also a member of VAST and I remember this quite clearly. There was a discussion on Bhaktivinoda's KRSNasaMhitA and many good points were brought forth, but Drutakarma silenced the whole thing by insisting that Bhaktivinoda was only saying what he said in that book "for preaching" and that it had nothing to do with siddhAnta. A pity. I always liked the KRSNasaMhitA.

Sincerely,
Elpis

I was having lunch out on the deck with my wife earlier and telling her about these discussions. I said that we are discussing things that were not possible to openly discuss years ago and that knowledge is available on the internet that was more or less unavailable years ago including quality translations of more esoteric writings that some of you are resonsible for. I feel very excited by the possiblities. I hope a real reform movement will grow out of this. I don't think it will happen in ISKCON. The last time I tried to quietly do that in 1980, it almost ended in disaster for me personally.

Since so many in these discussions do not say who or even where they are, I can only guess that many of us are Westerners. We have inherited this wonderful Indian devotional tradition warts and all. I feel like it is our responsibility to adapt it in such a way that intellligent, 21st century Westerners will be attracted, not be exploited and be able to practice in a sustainable manner.

Sorry Toke, to not have mentioned you. I should have also mentioned Madhusudani Radha, Kunti Devi (Hridayananda's brilliant disciple), Ekanath and his wife Dhyanakunda, all brilliant people for whom I have exceeding affection.

Unfortunately haven't been keeping as much in touch with these folks as I should.

By the way, Madhusudani tells me that the Columbia University Press volume that she and Edwin Bryant edited, which has a can't miss article by Ekanath (Ekkehard Lorenz) in it will finally be out this summer. Forget the exact name, something about an American Transplant or something. This book indirectly came out of VAST. Ekkehard's article is about the sources of Prabhupada's Bhagavatam. Some very interesting things for those who think it was the Supersoul talking directly into his heart.

I remember the Krishna-samhita discussion. Shukavak's book gave so many of the scholars hope that Iskcon was not confining everyone in some dogmatic straightjacket.

I agree very much with you. There is an "American" Buddhism, so it stands to reason that there will be an "American" Vaishnavism. It's up to us what we make of it.

All those non-Americans out there, please don't take offense. Actually, the most brilliant original Vaishnava minds in the West seem to come out of Harikesh's old zone. Is there a reason for that?

Amen! However, when I say "Westerners" I include Europeans, Australians, etc. Those of us who live in societies that have been influenced by the Enlightenment, modernism, post-modernism, etc., are wll educated, fairly affluent and hi-tech with a good degree of critical thinking and skepticism among the populace. Persons who want more of a reason for something than that it is the way it's always been done or because I say so. I must admit that there are many in the churches who accept those as good reasons, but that is not the approach I want to use or the persons I want to attract.

Remember, Christianity and Judaism are transplanted middle Eastern religions that have been Westernized. I can't vouch for how successful the Christian transplant has been. BTW, why is it that Hare Krishnas seem to be the butt of jokes while Buddhists seem much more respected in American society?

Do I think that Iskcon is in need of reform - yes.

Do I think it will happen in any substantial way - I am very doubtful about that. Hope springs eternal though - so while I am doubtful I remain hopeful.

But very much like you - I moved on years ago and I don't define myself in relation to Iskcon either.

I like Subal's optimism and it resonates with me deeply. The real reforms and innovations in terms of making a presentation that will be appropriate for the times in which we live and yet remain spiritually vital will come from those who have managed to capture the essence of the tradition and have found a genuine life of Bhakti. Most people are attracted to the inner substance but due to conditioning have the tendency to gravitate toward the periphery and snuff the life out of something which was full of life originally. This tendency leads to schisms based on external considerations such as dress, liturgy, arrangements on the altar, etc. Words that carried life at one time begin to ring hollow even though they have the same form.

I have heard some leaders within Iskcon speak and I cringe at some of the things being said because I feel that they are faithfully repeating what they heard but that they lack the spiritual insight to apply what it was they heard and adjust it to meet the demands of the times at hand. Too much fear of being a renegade or being labeled a deviant who thinks he/she knows better than Prabhupada. Until the leaders can get out of the past and develop a genuine dynamic spiritual life, which is what Prabhupada came to give them - I don't see how things will change much. Historically, anyone who was progressive and tried to advance was ostracized from the society for doing so - as was the case with those who took shelter of Sridhara Maharaja. This also seemed to be the direction it was going for Gour Govinda Maharaja before he departed from this world.

I would guess that the institution is so big and certain ways of thinking and doing things are so ingrained that it may always be the case that anyone with any genuine spiritual insight as to how to re-invent the institution and make it spiritually vital again will be thrown out or simply ignored as a deviant. That's the pessimistic side of me speaking. On the optimistic side - I would hope that Iskcon would eventually foster and encourage spiritual growth beyond the artificial boundaries it has set for itself - after all, those who join that mission do so for the same reasons we are all involved in Gaudiya Vaishnavism. I also do know some devotees who do have a much more dynamic vision and who are clearly very advanced spiritually who live in that institution. It may be that one day these people will have enough influence to effectively change things for the better.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

I have toyed with the idea of inviting other old VAST members here, but I don't because I don't want the rational side of things to dominate the Raganuga side too, too much. Maybe that would happen anyway...

Anyway, I expect it is likely that they will gradually discover it on their own.

This picture gives me the creeps...

Rasaraja,

Thank you for your thoughtful post. Overall, I agree with what you say. However, one of your points may be problematic:



Many of K's godbrothers would answer "yes" to the above questions. They believe that to "kick on their face with boots" is an appropriate "preaching tactic" when dealing with intractable opponents, and they cite their guru's words as justification for their angry and confrontational approach.

So the resolution of this problem is not quite as simple as your wonderful post might make it seem. Once a "bhakti terrorist" has decided that his opponent merits harsh treatment, that harshness can be delivered with ample precedent from the terrorist's guru-varga.

For a follower of Mahaprabhu, the real test comes in how we respond to such "bhakti terrorism." Do we automatically engage in "tit for tat," spurred by pride and egoism, or do we seek an appropriate Vaishnava response?

I don't believe I have ever encountered a shaven-headed Buddhist wearing a cheap wig, trying to convince me that he isn't really a Buddhist, but is simply raising money to fight youth drug abuse... "So please buy this (sticker, cookie, candle, oil painting)... Oh, and I have all these small bills; can you give me a $50 for some smaller bills..."

Respect has to be earned; you can't "change-up" for it. The "Hare Krishnas" earned the disrespect they receive, and it will take time to undo the self-inflicted damage. I think the popular image is changing, though. Just as the Mormons went from hated cult to respected pillar of the community in a span of less than 100 years, so too might "Hare Krishnas" in the West.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I agree with your point to a degree. I think where I do disagree is twofold:

1. ACBSP said many heavy things about his Godbrothers but he never allowed his Disciples to repeat such words. Obviously he knew they probably would as they generally tried to follow him in every way but ACBSP warned his disciples that they were not to speak in such a manner. This doesn't even go into the fact that the purity or disciplines in K's life don't exactly line up with those of ACBSP's. One can say that they feel ACBSP was "misdirected" in his philosophical understanding and teachings, that he was sexist/rascist or that he was influenced by the fame and power he quickly collected but I don't think anyone can or would say that he wasn't sincere and din’t try to give the Holyname to all he met. Remember sincerity does not make one right but it does mean something in a devotional context. ACBSP was clearly more pure, learned and faithful to his Guruji then K das.

2. If members of this board are to criticize ACBSP for the things he said, for the perceived venom of his statements, for judging those whose hearts and advancement he didn't know, etc. then how can we turn around and do the same thing? I believe Braja made this same point in another post. It seems foolish to condemn one for being a thief if your stiffing someone elses money in your pocket.

Finally my point in asking "Do your words please your Guru? Is this the mood and attitude that your Guru wants you to showcase and associate with other aspiring Vaisnavas with?": This was posed to those devotees who take part in this forum as I truly believe we all know the answer to this question. As you stated in your post I believe most of the Guru's of the devotees here would rather they address points with an appropriate Vaishnava response.

As for making that statement to ACBSP's followers, I still think it fits, but if it doesn't I simply avoid them; in all honesty, that is why I am involved with this forum.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Oh, dear! That's his replacement for the shifting picture of the woman he keeps flirting with? My mind has run several wise-ass comments (pardon the English), but I can't think of one that I'd like to take responsibility for. It does give me the creeps, though, and it just doesn't seem respectful.

He did it just for us. So I took him up on it...

The problem, though, is that far too many persist in this. They claim they're just quoting or following Prabhupada, despite his admonitions that they had no standing to do so and his declaration that whatever "war" there was was over. I run into this from pada and his ilk almost daily; whenever I mention the name of anyone they don't approve of, they start listing the times Prabhupada made some complaint about all his Godbrothers (don't even think about mentioning those not connected with Siddhanta Sarasvati!).

I understand the objections Subal and others have to some of these statements. Like Audarya, my response is different from Subal's, Advaita's, or Radhapada's, for example; that doesn't mean I necessarily have less respect for them as Vaishnavas. I feel the little bit of head-butting I did with Radhapada when I first came here helped me understand him better. And I know Subal from years ago, and my longstanding respect and affection demand that I respect his experience and his response to it. Nevertheless, I will try to share my own understanding when I think there may be something to be gained from it. As I and others have said before, I'm here because I think the different parties represented here may find things to learn from each other, and I hope that will shrink whatever gaps we may perceive to separate us. (And that without necessarily tearing down whatever borders may help in maintaining the integrity of those different branches.)

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I agree 150%. My point is that we shouldn't turn into "one of them". When we use the same arguments, vernacular, aggressiveness and obsession than what makes us any different?

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Sahajiya = imitator.

Audaruya lila (or any Saraswata rep)
You have made the point that the term can be applicable to any 'sadhaka'. Who is it then that can make a judgement, have authorization, or better put, have the qualification, on designating who is an 'imitating sadhaka', or 'sahajiya'? What would that person's status be?

Second question: Is an imitating sadhaka charectorized as a 'sahajiya' limited to those outside of the Gaudiya Math and ISKCON, or can a sahajiya be one within these organizations?

You mentioned imitating high levels of spiritual achievements. According to the BBT translation of the first verse of Nectar of Instruction:

"A sober person who can tolerate the urge to speak, the minds demands, the actions of anger and the urges of the tongue, belly and genitals is qualified to make disciples all over the world."

If a person has made disciples all over the world and yet, has been detected to exhibit some of the above, eg, anger, urges of the tongue and speech, etc. can it be said that such a person is imitating one who has the qualification to make disciples all over the world? According to your definition, can that person be called a sahajiya because they are assuming a high status but not have the qualification?

Well of course, that is if we accept the Iskcon translation of that sloka. In an earlier thread (dont ask me which one though) it was discovered that the last words prthivim sa sisyat means that the world (prthivim is earth in 2nd case, being the object) is under his control (sisyat). In other words (or worlds), control the microcosm of your self and you will automatically control the macrocosm of the world.

It is not exactly the same, Rasaraja. I agree that a civil tone makes all the difference but: It is still better to say the right thing roughly than to say the wrong thing roughly.

Dear Radhapada,

A genuine acharya will be able to ascertain what level a person is actually at, and hence, will be qualified to see if that attainment is syonymous with the persons actions and practices. I believe there are some nice verses in this regard in C.C. I can't remember the section, maybe in Mahaprabhu's instructions to Sanatana Goswami, anyway - the jist of the verses I am referring to is that the guru will be able to observe the sadhaka and see how he/she moves, speaks etc. and from those observations will be able to get an accurate assessment of their progress.

As far as the imitator label goes, yes, I do believe it is applicable to some people in Iskcon and Gaudiya matha.

As you know, the term also means easy or natural. Part of the critique included the idea that some sadhakas feel that they can easily move to the highest position without doing the necessary ground work - which you mentioned in your query - the first verse of Upadesamrta - controlling the tongue, belly and genitals. No easy task to be sure. This requires great sincerity of purpose, intense focus in nama bhajana and steady determination.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the term (the way it was used historically within GM and Iskcon) can and should be applied to those imitators who pose as highly advanced and able to help others while being firmly under the control of their own mind and senses. This has been one of the biggest problems for Iskcon since the departure of A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami.

You can take this one to the bank - Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati would be the most outspoken and harshest critic of what has gone on in the name of devotion within GM and Iskcon. He would be appalled that the institutions he founded fostered some of the worst deviations and pretense ever seen in the history of the sampradaya.

But you can also take this to the bank - the intention of the instruction was to help sadhakas be introspective about themselves and their own progress and the idea was to measure yourself with the 'imitation' stick - the instruction to us all - don't be a hypocrit. Be honest, satam, with yourself and others. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta very clear instruction in this regard is that we shouldn't criticize, but that we should be attentive to our own progress. It is the acharyas business to clear the path and he/she will give critique when needed for an individual under his/her care or in a general way to give instruction on universal principles.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa
Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

The obvious flaw with this statement is that whoever is making the statement thinks they are saying the right thing - hence they will feel justified to be rough about it according to your idea.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

BTW, this argument is the same one I used when I asked Nitai if it was wise to engage in slander and offense in the name of defending someone against such or in the name of speaking out against such a practice. It seems obvious enough - but not many are willing to apply the same standards to themselves that they so readily want to apply to others. This is obviously hypocritical and anyone can readily see it for what it is.

I think many of us will be very grateful to you if you could find us these texts you are referring to (I myself cannot remembering reading such a thing anywhere), so that we could further analyse and discuss them.

That controversy can easily be solved by Shastrik evidence of what is right and what is wrong, what is there and what is not there. You forgot that I said in the same post that a civil approach is always the preferred option.

[quote=Subal,Apr 2 2004, 09:07 PM] [QUOTE=Jagat,Apr 2 2004, 08:56 PM] [QUOTE=Subal,Apr 2 2004, 04:41 PM] [/QUOTE]
Amen! However, when I say "Westerners" I include Europeans, Australians, etc. Those of us who live in societies that have been influenced by the Enlightenment, modernism, post-modernism, etc., are wll educated, fairly affluent and hi-tech with a good degree of critical thinking and skepticism among the populace. Persons who want more of a reason for something than that it is the way it's always been done or because I say so. I must admit that there are many in the churches who accept those as good reasons, but that is not the approach I want to use or the persons I want to attract. [/quote]
As I was eating breakfast this morning I thought I would like to broaden the idea of who can benefit by a more Westernized form of Gaudiya vaisnavism. Many Indians are also becoming Westernized. One of the reasons Bhaktivedanta took Westerners to India was to show Indians who were eager to give up the Hindu faith that they should not be so quick to give up what the Westerners are adopting. I prefer to be inclusive rather than exclusive whenever possible.

So what's this entire thread about then? "I hate ISKCON"?

Enough already?

Madhava, that picture was offensive and not funny.

This thought came to mind again this morning. I have been criticised for claiming to know the mind of the guru. I think it is more than that. I remember he came right out and said it. I can't give you date and time and every word out of his mouth was not recorded and transcribed in those days, but that's how I remember it for what it is worth.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I absolutely agree with you on this point. I just wish we would spend a bit more time, and put more thought, into saying the right thing while taking into consideration how it is best to be said.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

I was just reading an EDITORIAL, Mar 22 (VNN) — Q & A with Swami B. V. Tripurari in which he says, "In general he told his disciples not to waste energy trying to follow every outdated rule and regulation." referring to Bhaktivedanta Swami. I agree with this. It gives us permission to decide what is outdated and what is not. If Bhaktivedanta adjusted the rules and regulations according to time and circumstance, is that not our responsibility also for those of us who are his disciples?

It is good if he had included his Guru's idea of Daiva Varnashram in this waste of energy.

Madhavananda simply copied that picture from Kshamabuddhi's Web site. He had that, flashing colors and all, at the top of his pages. It replaced a picture of a young woman with whom he flirts on his site (betel nut?). I think Madhava was just sharing with us a little of what KB's up to. He seems to think he's fashioning his site as an antidote to this one, based on his understanding that the purpose of this site is to give those engaged in raganuga practice a way to toot their own horns while denigrating in any way they can all those who practice Krishna consciousness under the guidance of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and his followers. I checked the stated purpose of this site last night, and it appears you could make a case that KB is mistaken.

November 17, 2003 - raganuga.com

Goes to show how much those acaryas follow the shastra.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

ISKCON with all thy faults I love thee.

I may not agree with everything said or done by ACBSP or his followers but I can have nothing but appreciation for the things that they have done to help humanity. I will not accept aspects which I feel are wrong nor will I ignore these apsects however i will also not let these things overshadow all of the positive aspects. I know many sincere and loving ISKCON devotees and their strength, determination, humility, kindness, appreciation for the Vaisnavas and service attitude are and always will be a reference point and influence on my desire to develop these same qualities. As many "bad apples" as there may be they can never overshadow the advanced souls that I know.

I offer my obeisances to ACBSP, his disciples and followers. Some from a distance and some up close. I hope they wish me well in my devotional endeavors, pray for my advancement and always think of me in a positive light.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

My point in presenting the questions regarding who is qualified to judge who is a 'sahajiya' and if sahajiyas can be Gaudiya Math/ISKCON members is this:

If the members of Saraswata institutions want to reform their institutions then they will have to go back and evaluate their teachings and denounce those that are un-Gaudiya Vaisnava. I don't believe Bhaktisiddhanta, Bhaktivedanta Swami, Sridhara Swami, Narayana Maharaja or any Saraswata follower is God or empowered by Him in any way to be omnicient enough to know individuals they have had no contact with and never lived with them to determine who is a false pretender or not. They may know if their disciples are (and as evident in the case of Bhaktivedanta Swami he knew some but didn't care and others he didn't even know their names) but they couldn't possibly know about everyone.

Gaurasundara
I don't hate ISKCON; I hate ignorance.

I know that verse in Nectar of Instruction is a mistranslation. Is was just to make a point. If everyone who is pretending to be bigger than what he is is a sahajiya, wouldn't that make a lot of gurus in the Saraswata institutions (no names) sahajiyas. Of course, I know in my sane mind that they are not but the point is that the terminologies, teachings, instructions, the end justifies the means--they all must be evaluated honestly and couragously for the benefit of people who follow your institutions for generations to come. I'll say again till I turn blue, the ones that are deviations should be denounced. Of course, it'll take a brave person to do this and for this reason, many have just chosen to get out altogether. It's probably the easiest thing, but if you love your institutions then some the principles would have to be modified.

Now the Goswamis don't know as much as Saraswati Goswami. Bhaktivedanta Swami says in a purport in CC that Sanatan Goswami was even influenced by the smarta brahmanas.

The question is, are we permitted to grab terms such as sahajiya completely out of their historical context?

Say, for example, I figured that some followers of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati were teaching strange doctrines, doctrines that are born out of the influence of mAyA. I could then justly call them mAyAvAdI, because that's after all what the term means, one whose doctrine has in my opinion to do with the effects of mAyA.

Therefore, I would like to announce that. Srila B.R. Sridhar, B.P. Keshava, and B.V. Tirtha Maharajas are àll mAyAvAdIs, and their followers are mAyAvAdIs too.

I think you get the point, yes?

Audarya, could you show me the word sahajiya in the Gosvamis books? You may include Bengali texts like Caitanya Caritamrita, Caitanya Bhagavat, Prem Bhakti Candrika and Bhakti Ratnakara.

You are raising a good point, Madhava. Sahajiya refers to an altogether different group of people whose sadhana and sadhya are different from those of the Gaudiyas. The sahajiyas as a group has been viewed with suspicion due to their use of a sexual sadhana, etc. So why did Bhaktisiddhanta use this term when he referred to traditional gaudiyas? Given the reputation of the Sahajiyas and the differences between the sadhanas in the two groups, this comes across as insulting.

In this connection Tripurari wrote the following in one of his Sangas:


Does anyone know exactly who the orthodox vaisnavas are who use the word prakrta-sahajiya? To the best of my knowledge the word sahajiya is used by itself. Take for example a passage from Bhaktivinoda Thakura cited in Shukavak's book about him (p. 240):

"Similarly, the illicit cohabitation with females by Sahajiyas, Nedas, Bauls, and Kartabhajas, and the rest, which is commonly practiced, is utterly against the principles of religion."

Here Bhaktivinoda uses the word sahajiya and clearly indicates that the people he associates with this name have illicit cohabition with women. Shukavak cites the Bengali text in an appendix, and the word prakrta is not to be found there in connection with sahajiya.

Anyway, the fact is that Bhaktisiddhanta used the word sahajiya -- a loaded word -- to designate a group, or parts of a group, that really had nothing to do with what the true Sahajiyas stand for. This certainly seems offensive.

Sincerely,
Elpis

Haridas has now joined the ranks of the moderated members.

I am not Audarya, pardon me for interfering.

Krishnadas Kaviraja describes the mAyAvAdIs Caitanya met as follows:

ei mata pratisUtre sahajArtha chADiyA |
gauNArtha vyAkhyA kare kalpanA kariyA || CC 1.7.133

"In this way, they renounced the sahajiyA-treasure in all those sUtras, and instead speculated all sorts of secondary meanings."

Here we can actually observe that only mAyAvAdIs fail to recognize the treasure of sahajiyAism.

Advaita Prabhu addresses Nitai:

tora jAti-kula nAhi, sahaje pAgala || CC 2.3.97

"You have no caste or family dynasty; you are a sahajiyA-madman!"

The theory that sahajiyAism is offensive is hereby refuted:

prabhu kahe - nindA nahe, sahaja kahila |
ihAte tomAra kibA aparAdha haila || CC 2.15.257

Prabhu said: "That was no blasphemy; he spoke of the sahajiyA-philosophy. How could it have therefore offended you?"

The heart of a sahajiyA is neat and clean, full of spirituality;

sahaje nirmala ei brAhmaNa-hRdaya |
kRSNera vasite ei yogya-sthAna haya || CC 2.15.274

"In a sahajiyA, there are no faults. His heart is spiritual, and a befitting place for Krishna to sit down."

SahajiyAism is in fact synonymous with prema-dharma:

rAya kahe, kaha sahaja-premera lakSaNa |
rUpa-gosAJi kahe, sAhajika prema-dharma || CC 3.1.149

Ramananda Raya said, "What are the characteristics of sahajiyA-prema?`"
Rupa Gosvamin replied, "The entire prema-dharma is sahajiyAism."

In this way, many authoritative references can be given.

How could I have been so arrogant to think I know shastra?

You forgot the word brahmin here in your translation. A qualified one of course, in this special case.

"The heart of this sahajiya brahmin is completely pure...."

Oh, I translated brAhmaNa as "spiritual", that which is of brahma. But of course, a sahajiyA-brAhmaNa is likely closer to the original intent of the text. After all, one who is a sahajiyA is naturally also a brAhmaNa.

Sparky on saraswata.net, Sunday:



It is clear Prof. Sparky did not catch the joke we were making. Never mind, Prof. Perhaps you could show us then the word prakrita Sahajiya in the Gosvamis books, including Caitanya Caritamrita and down to Bhakti Ratnakara? Thanx!

At the beginning of the Caitanya school there was no need to proclaim other paths as deviants because the Caitanya school itself was new and had no established dogma, only later could there be an attempt to distinguish between those who use similar concepts within a tantric milieu (sahjiyas) from the school established by the goswamis etc.

Only later would that make sense, the need was seen by those within the Caitanya school to distinguish between those who may use the same terminology as themselves leading to confusion amongst outsiders between the tantrics ( who had gained in disrepute in indian society) and the non tantrics.

heno kripamoy caitanya na bhaje je jan; sarvottama hoile-o tate asura ganan
(Caitanya Caritamrita Adi 8.12)

'Whoever does not worship this merciful Caitanya is counted amongst the demons though he may be the most elevated person."

Some of what I have seen on this thread and others like it on other sites/forums, is a critique (not a critism) of some of the words spoken or tactics used by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaj in the course of his preaching. Those who are critiqueing are for the most part, not his disciples, and are doing so from a more neutral point of view than what could likely be done by a direct disciple. (Although I am aware that Subal and Jagat have both taken initiation from him). The critiques are also coming from persons having grown up in western society with western ideologies. With western (or rather, modern-day) ideology, values, customs being what they are, a neutral critique could be just as well made regarding other Gaudiya gurus in India and the beliefs/customs/superstitions they may follow that have sprung from their cultural conditionings. For example; would Lalit Prasad Thakur or Sripad Ananta das Panditji take prasad cooked by a female disciple who was having her mentrual period at the time of cooking? If not, why not? Are any women doing Thakur seva in the pujari mode in Sripad Ananta das Panditji's mandir (if he has one)? If not, why not? If they are pujaris there, are they doing their puja during their menstrual times also? If not, why not?
This may seem like a ridiculous point to you all but believe me, it is not to many women around the world, including India, where superstitions regarding that time of the month are still abounding within even what you may perceive as "progressive" sangas and discriminations are levied based on that.

All western devotees I know dont having menstruating women cooking for the deities, and as far as I know this is also not allowed in Iskcon temples. This is simply a matter of Vaishnava sadacara, not of eastern or western.

Well, those rules outlined in Hari Bhakti Vilas were mainly rules based on the culture from the area of where it was written and the particular time frame in which it was written also. At that time cleanliness was not as easy to come by as it is in modern day society where women at that time of the month can easily take several warm showers a day and prevent any sticky and embarrassing situations from arising due to modern day efficient products. Therefore those rules are out-dated.

I agree with betal nut. It's time for a change. I suppose this is a major question for me; are vaishnavas willing to change and give up outmoded ways of thinking and acting or are you just willing to tinker around the edges making small adjustments here and there worried about what others will think or say? I believe a bold paradigm shift is needed.

As for me, I stripped away the cultural externals when I left ISKCON 30 years ago, and I am doing just fine. I am a feminist and believe discrimination against women needs to stop.

I've also been hearing arguments here that when one does so and so, follows xxx number of rules and regulations perfectly without flaw, then one is a pure devotee and can claim to be such and such. What about grace? Can't one attain pure devotional service and spontaneous love of God through the grace of a pure devotee or directly from God within the heart without going through all the rigmarol? I am not a scriptural scholar but I know many examles are there. If that means being a sahajia, I'm happy to claim that title. I've lived for 30 years without anyone from ISKCON or GM telling me what to do. I'm quite happy with my relationship to God. It's not necessary to jump through other people's hoops to get back to Godhead.

Yes, the cultural details are certainly adjustable, but this is a sensitive area. What one considers cultural details are essential aspects to another. Hence, we must approach the matter with considerable caution.

In playing the iconoclast of old Indian culture, we must nevertheless remember that even the eternal realm of Vraja incorporates many of these "outdated" aspects, and as such, some of them may serve us favorably in assisting us to perceive the social realm of Vraja.

What ever happened to harer nama, harer nama, harer nama nasteva kevalam? (Not sure of the exact transliteration, but you know what I mean.) Just chant Hare Krishna and be happy. In the beginning of ISKCON it was very simple. As time went on things got more complicated and there was more of a competition as to who was holier and who followed the rules more strictly. Down with the rules!

Siksastaka (2)

nAmnAm akAri bahudhA nija-sarva-zaktis
tatrArpitA niyamitaH smaraNe na kAlaH
etAdRzI tava kRpA bhagavan mamApi
durdaivam IdRzam ihAjani nAnurAgaH

"O my Lord, Your holy name alone can render all benediction to living beings, and thus You have hundreds and millions of names, like Krishna and Govinda. In these transcendental names You have invested all Your transcendental energies. There are not even hard and fast rules for chanting these names. O my Lord, out of kindness You enable us to easily approach You by Your holy names, but I am so unfortunate that I have no attraction for them."

Another thing I've been thinking is that just like the early Christians progressively elevated their understanding of Jesus from human to God as time passed, starting with Mark and going to John with about 30 years in between, similarly, my guru started out as A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami who we called Swamiji, then he became Prabhupada and now, some consider him the greatest guru ever, on a par with God. Wow! Think about it.

The second verse of Siksastakam, though often cited to support the "no rules" idea, just says that there are no restrictions regarding the time (kAlaH) when the names may be remembered.

Some rules are discardable, but they may not be rejected without due deliberation. niyamAgrahaH ... bhaktir vinazyati.

I agree with the negative effects of competing on who follows the rules more strictly, though. Everyone should mind their own rules and stay off each others' backs.

I humbly apologize to Madhava for thinking that he was responsible for creating and posting that offensive picture of Srila Prabhupada. I did not realize that it was a creation of Kshamabuddhi. Apologies again to all concerned.

In Tamil Nadu I have come accross the expression "out of the house" (I do not know the expression in Tamil) which describes the time of menstruation of a woman. It was explained to me, that in olden times women took a time-out, retreated to a house where only women were alowed and spent their three four days there. A malicious analyst may, of course, say, they were segregated. I have heard of similar descriptions of Amerindian customs., and it is seen in societies where people are living closer to the cycles of nature.

I think, there may be some aspect of facticity to the situation. In physiological terms there appears to be an observable purification occuring in a woman who is menstruating. It has to do with the flow of prana which is reversed at that time. It is getting most easily perceivable when it is completely absent due to removal of the uterus in a young woman; that woman cannot experience that time of prana-reversal in her microcosmos anymore, which throws her out of synch with the cycles of the moon, the macrocosmic cycle. The moon is the transmitter of prana from the sun to the earth. Women are strongly attuned to the cycles of the moon, since they are the personal nourishers of life, its foundation, in a sense. That moon-attunement makes women so much more sensitive than men are.

I think, instead of looking at it only in plain secular, scientific, 21st century terms, it is worthwhile to see the bigger picture of the placement of woman and her cycle in the process of life, and not see things only in terms of condemnable scales of purity-impurity, or ritual (in)acceptability. So ritual rules can also be seen as formalized rules of conduct for the protection of the persons concerned, and need not be interpreted as a sexist prejudice.

While there are certainly physical differences between men and women, I believe a more androgynous psychological balance between the male and female aspects of the personality, between the anima and animus, produces a more whole personality. It is through social engineering, either conscious or unconscious over the millenia, that both physical and psycological traits of males and females have been emphasized for the sake of division of labor. Now we have women soldiers, doctors, lawyers, priests, etc. and stay at home dads, male nurses, hair dressers, etc. The more men can get into their nourishing, senstive sides, the better off they and women will be. I certainly believe manjari bhava is helpful in this regard.

Sensible too.

I think this is an interesting subject. Do you think you could give some examples of the "warped teachings" that you speak of?

Bhaktivedanta Swami created the Gurukul, an educational system whereby children can learn basic academics and become devotees of Krsna.

Children should be enrolled at the age of 5. I was a Gurukul teacher in Vrndavan for a few years. I think it is pyschologically traumatic and damaging for young children to be left in a boarding school away from the shelter of the parents. Children need to be nourished emotionally from their parents, otherwise they are prone to suffer pyschological deficiencies when they are older.

Only basic academics were to be given eg. math, reading and writing. The main emphasis was a Krsna conscious education. In the USA it is considered child abuse to not provide a child with proper education. Bhaktivedanta Swami told Nitai in Mayapur in 1975, "We don't need scholars, we want pure devotees." He said this in response to a proposal by Nitai to have a standardized curriculum developed whereby the Gurukul would be recognized as an accreddited school and receive public support and funding. Bhaktivedanta Swami rejected it and smashed him for his idea. Today however, after its many failures, Gurukul strives for that.

It is certainly a wonderful thing if such a thing exist as going to a school to become a pure devotee, but it is far from the truth of Gaudiya Vaisnava teachings. Children first need to developed some self-esteem and confidence in order to progress emotionally. If after they go through a training for many years and come out with nothing that is on par with the secular system of education they will feel like nobodies and become demoralized. Which is what has happened.

The Gurukul was a means for parents to drop the load of parental responsiblity from them unto an institution in order for them to do service to the institution, which was considered more important. This is what the majority of kids complain about. I have not seen this written as of yet, but in principle this was the situation. Service to the institution was more valuable than caring for their children. Many of these children wound up being abused in all sorts of ways by the people who were supposed to care for them. The parents can only say, "We did it because this was Prabhupada's desire, we were only trying to be surrendered to Prabhupada." Would the kids understand that?

Children must get up for brahma muhrta and attend mangal arotik and so forth. When I was teaching in school I was often seeing kids nodding out in class. How can you teach someone young, when they need the most sleep, if they've been up since 3:30 am?

Children need a stick. This was taken quite literally. I have seen and heard the anguish cries of one young boy beaten with a stick by a temple president who had the physique of Mike Tyson. He was so demoralized from so much abuse he went to live in the hard road of material life only to be run over by a truck in his teens to his death. This is sadistic. Of course, this was not the case of the rest of the victims. Drug abuse and promiscuous sexual behavior is rampant amongst these victims of abuse. I have seen kids in Vrndavan come stoned out on drugs to play mrdanga in the kirtan--the ISKCON version of 'prakrta sahajiyas'--a result of being misguided. The alumnis have disco parties in the dhama and go swimming and diving with the gals and guys in Kusum Sarovara.

This whole gurukula system is wrong, in my opinion. Why force little children to practice KC? Of course some interpret this as giving them a chance... I think none of us was raised in a KC family, we grew up in a completely materialistic atmosphere, and maybe this served as an impetus to search for an alternative. I have seen in many cases that children brought up in religious families turned against religion later and they were angry at their parents for trying to manipulate them into something they did not necessarily want. This is like modern day "preaching", trying to "make" devotees. I remember how upset I was when my former spiritual master told me after initiation to "make my wife and son devotees". I immediately felt that this is not proper. I guess it is completely wrong to force "the only way to salvation" to others, let us leave this method to Iskcon, Jehova's witnesses and other groups centered around money and religious fanaticism.

I don't agree. Children are meant to be brought up, their potential to be given every possibility for realization. I am not in favor of the Gurukula system as run by incompetents. Most of what Radhapada says I agree with, but it is clear to me that the elites of all societies favor boarding schools for the complete education of their children. Eton, Harrow, The Doon School, etc., Switzerland, etc., are where they send their offspring. They have good reasons for it.

This is what it costs in the US. Who do you think is keeping these schools open and running? Why?

The rich are all too happy to see everyone else get all sentimental. They keep their power by their network of exclusive educational institutions.

The failure of the Gurukula system was really a failure of management and then a failure of nerve. There was nothing wrong with the basic concept. The problem was in the execution.

To which I add a current thought: There is a mistaken concept about sadhana, that one has to do a little bit of everything and especially a lot of chanting Harinam. Though for one who has a taste for Harinam, it is important to chant, it is not the only activity of devotional service.

ek aGga sAdhe keha sAdhe bahu aGga
niSThA haite upajaya prema-taraGga

Some engage in only one devotional practice, some engage in many. Through one's commitment to the practice [which suits his temperament], one is immersed in the waves of ecstatic love.

The gurukulas unfortunately succeeded in many cases in creating the wrong kind of samskara in the students. The objective should be well-rounded, cultured individuals with a spiritualized outlook on the world, who can participate in the world and influence it through their ideals. We wanted to make our children into our image, and unfortunately we were looking at ourselves through broken mirrors.

That having been said, it's not for everyone. A successful society has a variety of institutions making a variety of choices possible.

Is your son in a boarding school? And if not, is finance the only reason for that?

No, he's not. And finance is NOT the reason. But then I am not part of the elite. He does go to a good Catholic private school, though. Luckily, on a scholarship.

I did add a caveat at the end of my previous post.

I think Radhapada is right on the ball. And what's more - Mahaprabhu, Rupa-Sanatan, Bhaktisiddhanta, and swayam ACBS - none of them went to Gurukula. The leaders and founders of our sampradaya. ACBS even went to a Christian school - his Vaishnava upbringing at home was enough. Yet they spread KC all over the world - and saved themselves so many traumas.

Gaura Mohan De thought that good education in good schools coupled with a healthy spiritual upbringing at home was good enough for his little Abhay.

I certainly don't believe it should be an obligation.

Keep in mind it was at Scottish Church's College that Abhay Charan De "learned" of the "lesser intelligence" of women due to their lighter brain weight!

Would he have learned otherwise in an Iskcon Gurukula?

But then, if things were otherwise with Bhaktivedanta Swami, some of us would have not found purpose in life.

You're absolutely right here. The question is of ritual purity, rather than sexism. If a women who is undergoing her menses is cooking and/or offering foodstufss to the Deity, the "smell" of the menses is transmitted into those offerings and as such it is not a a suitable offering to the Deity. One may counter, "what 'smell' are you talking about?" Well, all these rules were composed with knowledge of other planes in mind as well as the gross one therefore they may not necessarily be understood by those who have no access to other planes and therefore cannot understand.

A similar thing is applicable to males, especially in the case of being sexually impure i.e.: having emitted semen. I do not know the Vedic term for it, but in Islamic terms a man who has emitted semen is in a state of 'Junub' and is "ritually impure", thus he is not fit for offering prayers five times a day and such things until he takes a ritual bath.

In ISKCON, they talk about being "brahminically clean." Certain rooms are off-limits except to "brahminically clean" pujaris. If you go to the toilet wearing clean clothes then you are again "impure" and should again take a bath and put on clean clothes. This is very good. These are aspects of sadacara and not cult behaviour.

As you rightly proclaim these are all aspects of sadacara, so great care should be taken before deciding which aspects of Vaisnava culture are "outdated" and should not be observed, and so on.

Perhaps this is one reason why only an "empowered Acarya" is qualified to adjust the rules according to desa-kala-patra.

And pardon me for pointing this out, but many ladies tend to be a bit cranky and less concentrated at that time of the month, and generally are better off doing something else than elaborate puja-procedures.

Betalji, perhaps you can try and do an hour of puja early morning, cook an offering, offer it, and then do a bit more puja and an arotik on top of it next time when the time of the month comes. Get back to us with the results.

Science, nothing beats it...

Dear Radhapada,

I had an inkling that you might reply along the lines that you did. First I will emphatically agree with you regarding your points, but I'm afraid that I must disagree when it comes to matters of education vis-a-vis Vedic culture. The institution of 'gurukula' is not a creation of Bhaktivedanta Swami, but it has been in place for centuries, nay, millenia. It is part of the azrama of brahmacarya, and it is implicitly accepted that every male (or female?) child of a family needs to go to gurukula in order to learn. In Western terms, this translates as being enrolled in boarding school.

Of course an issue arises along two points:

- The situation of present-day India does not allow for traditional gurukula education.
- The point above is also strengthened when questioning if a gurukula model/experiment would work in the West.

Obviously the gurukula experiment went wrong and a lot of suffering was caused, but I think we should be careful not to condemn the institution itself because of that since it has worked very well for millenia.

I'd like to comment on some of the points you make later:


In traditional Vedic culture, I believe that brahmana children were given the upavita at age 5 and initiated into the Gayatri-mantra. The other two castes, ksatriya and vaisya, are similarly initiated at later ages such as age 7 and 9 or something. Thus began their education.
As far as parental influence is concerned, I agree that this is a rather harsh thing. I am not aware of every particular detail but I was under the impression that emotional and psychological nourishment would be provided by the guru's wife who is to be respected as mother? Remember that we are thinking of full-time residential boarding schools here, and no wonder there are so many injunctions against the sin of having sex with the guru's wife and especially the prohibition againt older brahmacaris having intimate association with the guru's wife!


I agree with your comments on this point. At least in the times of Canakya, students could learn whatever they wanted to learn; business, politics, medicine, you name it. They all had to go to specific gurukulas though, just as one who wants to study law may well enroll at Harvard Law School while someone who wants to do engineeering may well enroll at MIT. I suppose Bhaktivedanta Swami's idea of gurukula was meant as a theological college of some sort.


I vehemently agree with your comments on this. This is frankly an abuse as far as I am concerned.


I also vehemently agree with your comments here, this is also a gross abuse. I also remember reading of one incident in which it was reported to Bhaktivedanta Swami that some "naughty" children were being beaten. Bhaktivedanta Swami became so angry and upset at this that he declared that those who beat children should be hanged, repeating it three times. Of course I doubt that he was being serious, but it was pretty clear that he did not approve of violence to children. This was made even more apparent when it was submitted to him that the child in question was disruptive and naughty. Bhaktivedanta Swami refused to accept such a lame excuse and reiterated his stance. Quite rightly too. I become angry even if I pass by a mother who smacks her child's bottom for no reason at all especially if they are crying over something.

Bhagavata 7.12.13 mentions that living in the gurukula is for the dvija. This suggests that there are people with different psychological make-ups, who are variably suitable or unsuitable for such a model of education. The problem is if we brand everyone a brahmana, kids included, and expect them to artificially live up to the standard without the appropriate samskaras, both genetic and psychological.

How many?



What is your excuse?

3692 and half.


My toe hurts.

Some good points where brought up.



The students living in the Gurukul asrama where not disciples of the asrama teacher and for the most part they were single men. It seems that the role of the Guru's wife did play of some importance to the development of the child.

To me, Gurukul asrama living would seem like a long drawn-out ISKCON bhakta program. The bhakta leader or asrama teacher is the real teacher of the students, living with them and dealing with them on a day to day basis. On the otherhand, the ISKCON initiating Guru plays a minor role, but gets all the glory from the disciple who forgets who really trained them. In truth, most of the children don't get initiated anyway. So they've put in many years in a school that doesn't give them material credentials nor much spiritual. By the time many of them finish, they're ready to party hard!

The Bhagavata illustrates the lila of Sri Krsna and Sri Balarama staying in the asrama of their teacher. Anyone knows the duration of time that the Lords spent there?

It would be ideal to have a school wherein kids can get good academic training to be able to compete with others in terms of academic achievments as well as have some religious studies. However, I believe that shaving kids up, making them put on dotis, lolipop tilak and making them do all sorts of tapa is not advantagous to them. They look and feel wierd. I have seen them feel demoralized having to cut their hair they've grown over the summer to have it shaved and cut into a little pig tail in the back. In general, they can do tapa in some bhakti boy scout outings, but not on a daily basis. Otherwise its pathetic, their shaved up looking like Vamana deva and in a couple of years their smoking joints, drinking, getting layed and some of them eating meat. You can't dress a child up to look like something they are not, unless they want to. At home, when I start singing with harmonium my little daughter likes to dress in a long skirt and starts to dance thinking she's a gopi. Kids have to want to be a devotee, it can't be forced.

Nothing that doctor Frog can't fix, hopefully.

Could you provide some references for the ages that you give? They seem to me to be incorrect. According to the GRhya-sUtras, the upanayana was performed for brAhmaNas at the age of 8, for kSatriyas at the age of 11, and for vaizyas at the age of 12. To the best of my knowledge these ages were followed by later authorities also.

I believe that these ages are connected with the distance between the gArhapatya and the AhavanIya in Vedic rituals. The distance differs according to the varNa of the yajamAna: the AhavanIya is to be established at a distance of 8 prakramas from the gArhapatya when the yajamAna is a brAhmaNa, at a distance of 11 prakramas when the yajamAna is a rAjanya, and at a distance of 12 prakramas when the yajamAna is a vaizya. See BaudhAyana-zulba-sUtra 3.1 (Sen and Bag's edition; it is 1.63-66 in Thibaut's edition).

Anyway, 8 is certainly a much more reasonable age than 5.

Sincerely,
Elpis

When I was living in the Danish ISKCON temple, I was once enrolled as part of the management team (it did not last too long, though). At that time someone was suggesting that the female devotees could easily do service during their period of "contamination" (the usual rule was that they were given three days to rest and chant extra rounds). The service that this person had in mind was not deity service or cooking, but chores such as cleaning. However, it turned out that the female devotees were not all that happy about this proposal (some were actually quite upset about it); they preferred to be able to rest rather than doing active service in that period.

However, everybody is different and some women may want to continue doing deity service in this period.

Sincerely,
Elpis

I'll have a look but I'm not confident. You're probably right anyway.

Although Sridhar Swami's Bhagavat comment says that only a shudra is not given upanayan, and Elpis' quote of the Grhya Sutras seem to confirm that vaisyas and ksatriyas can get upanayan, in 9 years that I lived in India I have never seen vaisyas and ksatriyas with threads on - and this is also clear from photos of Gaurakishor das Baba - a vaisya - and Bhaktivinod - a ksatriya. They were not wearing threads. Why is that then?

Don't let Kshamabuddhi see that comment.
He'll do a "spotlight" on it.

Perhaps by their time the practice had deteriorated or perhaps for those castes upanayan is optional and they opted out.

Its not optional, they have to do it. But most people these days do not give much importance to caste considerations.

As far as Bhaktivinoda and Gaurakisor are concerned, they could have given it up when they became babajis, Advaitaji?

I have never seen any photo of BVT as a Babaji. His grhastha photos are sans upavit.

I guess this is a babaji picture of Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur from his last days:

Nobody HAS to do anything.

Nabadip -

I am fully aware of the fact that in ancient times many cultures gave women a much needed period of rest during their menstrual days. However, as time passed this courtesy was then turned into scorn under the superstition that women were somehow "contaminated" or "impure" during those days. It is this attitude which I am addressing.

Madhava-

I'm sure many women would gladly welcome a few days of rest and relaxation at this time. However, most are having to rise early, get dressed, cook breakfast, feed and ready their kids for school, then get into a car and drive or use public transportation or walk to their jobs where many of them have to be on their feet all day, then again walk or public transport it back home, cook and clean again, etc.
I'm sure those women would view a few hours of puja in the morning as a vacation!

Gaurasundara-

I am aware that there are issues of "impurity" with males in Islam, Hinduism and other religions as well. My question addresses if some, most or all of these old rules are now irrelevent due to modern progress of cleanliness standards, etc.

Jagadananda has put a picture of Sri Lalita-prasada Thakura, Sri Bhaktivinoda Thakura's son, in his profile. On the picture we see him wearing a sacred thread.

Sincerely,
Elpis

Yep, so it is, bright and clear.

Bhaktivinoda: here and here without a shirt, and without an upavita. The second image would probably be from his later years as a tyagi.

Now, of course we could take him through Photoshop and give him one, and then send it over to Narasingha Maharaj. "We found it in the archives of Caitanya Research Institute."

Now I am curious as to why Lalita-prasada Thakura is wearing a sacred thread when his father was not. Did Bhaktivinoda Thakura have his sons undergo an upanayana ritual even though he himself had not had one?

I wouldn't make too much of it. Many people in India, especially those who consider themselves upper caste, consider wearing the upavita their right, especially if they have spiritual pretensions.

The attitudes of people are not affected by us writing here. But I think it is our job to look at the underlying reasons why certain attitudes have developed.

There is one practical aspect why a menstruating woman should not do puja or other ritual work. There is a conflict between ritual and health rules here. A menstruating woman should not take a cold bath, whereas to do puja it is mandatory to take a bath before commencing each time. Water should not touch a woman's head, otherwise she can go deaf, if done during menstruation. This was common folk knowledge even in Europe among women. If you look at the amount of baths to be taken by a pujari, it is obvious that a menstruating woman could never comply with this, let alone that for health reason she should not take any (cold) bath at all. In India every bath was/is with cold water.

One other aspect is the fact that there are women who have a really heavy flow on the second day, which keeps them busy changing pads. There is obviously a practical difficulty involved. Now imagine the situation in India with only one pump, or one well available near a house, and combine this with her duty to do puja or cook. In India cooking is at least a half-day affair. If a woman was alone doing the cooking, she would get nowhere if she had a heavy flow.

Betal_nut, I understand your feminist concerns.

Suppose a pujari was a bleeder (haemophiliac), and he had a heavily bleeding wound on the day he would do puja. It would be common sense there, that he takes care of his blood-flow instead of doing the puja. There may not be a ritual rule for haemophiliacs, because they are rare, while there are rules for menstruating women. Any woman with a heavy flow will agree that it is a mess on that day. That is certainly a situation that can be seen as contaminating, for instance in a sterile lab. Why should not there be rules of cleanliness and purity in kitchen and altar room as well?

Given the modern situation, and a woman being alone, not in a sanga, I would not see a reason why should not do her puja though.

Blood in general is considered impure when it's outside the body, regardless of the gender of the person from whom it originates, and after having come in touch with blood one would not be ritually pure before bathing, if one is to follow strict standards of ritual purity.

Right. That is why there are sudras and those who are also known as "outcastes." They do not have to do anything.

Right, and as I brought the point up: Who is capable of "deciding" what is irrelevant and what is not?

I, for one, would not even go there.




Also, the simple fact that these considerations of "ritual impurity" and the like are present even in other forms of religion shows a common thread in all of them, one which is more than likely to have a divine or an otherwise "empowered" origin. I wouldn't mess about with something like that. Of course everyone is free to observe and do whatever they want. My path is: mahajano yena gata sa panthah.

I am afraid this is incorrect, Gaurasundara. In principle, everyone HAS to do something. No one is free of obligation, not even God. Some might be under less formal obligation, subject to lesser rituals, etc. but ultimately there is no absolute freedom, everyone is at the mercy of something besides oneself, or anOther. Whether one is "capable" of deciding what is relevant and what is not, is just a matter of making the decision. Conclusively, I would say there is no choice but to "go there", and for such journey, you just leave back your luggage - you need but your courage.

Betal nut,

sorry to barge in in this exchange.

Yes certainly, Anand. My main point was that sudras and outcastes are not "required" all that much to do the things that the upper three castes do. I was being rather broad when I said "they don't have to do anything."

Exactly.

Some time back I was doing seva chopping vegetables and the like. I inadvertently cut my finger with the knife and it started to bleed. I knew this was "bad" and the kitchen supervisor knew it too. He simply wrapped my finger in a piece of plastic and tied around it with an elastic band to make it secure.

Now if I was a strict practitioner of ritual purity I'd have had to wait for the cut to heal, take a bath, and then put on fresh clothes. While I carry that out, the task of cutting vegetables (ultimately for prasad) is delayed so it is not very practical. Hence I carried on cutting while muttering a couple of mantras under my breath to "sanctify" the activity. The lesser emergency is in subservience to the greater emergency.

I guess this is an occasion when the 'desa-kala-patra' clause kicks in; some things can be modified or dispensed with whereas others cannot.

I thought betal_nut needs solid reasons for rules of ritual purity. That they make sense, and are not just sexist statements.

When my little sister was young, whenever somebody told her to do something, she would insist (loudly) that, "In this world, nobody has to do anything but to take birth and to die!" In fact, not even to breath, although we might think so; she would demonstrate her persistence in not complying with the "you have to do" order by holding her breath until she knocked out and went all blue.

So, nobody has to do anything.

Sounds like a worthy sister. A little bit of her in you perhaps?

Wasn't the whole Bhagavad-gita spoken for the purpose of instigating Arjuna to get violent with the non-devotees and in fact use "atom bombs" (brahmastra) on those that opposed the seating of the Vaishnava as the Emporer of the world?

Followers of Lord Krishna in fact have a mandate to get violent with those that obstruct the welfare activities of establishing the Krishna-bhakta as Emporer of the world.

This might all sound like a lot of phantasmagoria to modern people who are in denial that the demonic civilization of materialism and capitalism, communism etc. is destined for a horrific end, leaving the world in chaos and lacking centralized power and authority that is presently stiffiling spiritual culture in society.

However, when these forms of society fail and the world is thrown into a bitter struggle for existence, it might in fact become a reality that atom bombs can be used to snuff out demonic civilizations in order to preserve the societies of devotees and religious people.

Many of Srila Prabhupada's instructions pertain to future scenarios and future circumstances. He wasn't just preaching to this present stage of human civilization.
He could look long into the future and foresee the fall of capitalism and speak in terms of conditions that we cannot imagine at the present time.

It 's easy to pass judgement by being a subscriber of the status-quo, but it is not as easy to look into the future and understand how many instructions that Srila Prabhupada gave might come into play at some future date and in some future circumstances.

Kshamabuddhi, as I said already in the other thread, I think you have a quite a bit of explaining to do before anyone will be entertaining even a remote possibility of interaction with you.

With what we read you have going on in that forum of yours, it is evident that you have next to no regard for the people posting in this forum, and in the end you are only looking forward to quarreling with us. You have proven this consistent pattern of behavior many times over.

I'll have to make this account of yours moderated as well. Rest assured, however, any and all polite posts will surface as one of our moderators previews them first.

Fine. I won't bother. My responses will be posted on Saraswata.net.
I can see you aren't prepared to meet my challenge with anything except censorship.

I heard many times that he said that ISKCON devotees should line up all the homosexuals against a wall and shoot them with a machine gun.

Yeah, but I won't be finding them here.

Anyway, Nabadip, your point about the village well/pump, lack of hot water, water in general, and other things was exactly my point.... times have changed and at least where I live, hot water is available all day long for our baths (showers). Therefore, common sense is enough to rule this rule out.

If Gaurasundar can chop Thakurji's veggies with a bloody finger then I can do the same with a well padded something else!

Did that include child molesters with tilak on their noses too?

YOU heard many times that He said. Ok give these many sources. You can't do it. I challenge you. And saying so and so said it does not count. Real sources.

Typical response. You people are filled with the vilest of venom. You are poison and aparadha personified.

Odd--that's something I've never heard, and I've been involved with ISKCON devotees since 1969. And I certainly haven't been sheltered from the company of homphobic ISKCON members. I suspect I've heard most of the slurs going around ISKCON, including those sometimes attributed to Srila Prabhupada, but this one is new to me. That's not to say that Radhapada didn't hear this. I have spent my adult life almost entirely in Hawaii and California, with brief trips to a few other places, so I wouldn't be shocked to hear that some ISKCON members in places I've never been are making such a claim.

That's why I said, "I've heard" from my former Temple President of Puerto Rico ISKCON temple (1980-1984) and Vice President of New York ISKCON Temple (1977-1980), Vakreswara Pandit. I remember in 1981 he was 'preaching' to some guests on Sunday and he told this us in the room. I heard it again some other times, but this was the first time. I would like it confirmed if ACBVS did actually say this one. Maybe Subal may have heard it or know of it.

So far confirmed are the following:

Having Gita in one hand and gun in the other.
Women get better when you beat them.
Householder devotees are licking the leaking vagina (that's on a taped lecture with the title "Licking the Leaking Vagina").
Women like rape (purport to Bhagavata)
Spiritual master should ride in a car of gold.
Blacks should be placed into slavery (room convesation).
Sri Candrashekara and Sri Tapan Misra are low grade devotees (purport to CC).





Frau Farbissini
Which ones are you referring to?

Yes, it is good that you keep your anti-campaign there. Anyway, we wouldn't know how to respond to your killer arguments of fire and brimstones, so it is best if you do not come here to embarass us, but instead enjoy your rightful position as the sole (only) flagbearer of the anti-campaign in your own forums. I trust you feel it will eventually fulfill all of your spiritual aspirations.

A devotee from Australia once told me that he had heard a lecture of Bhaktivedanta in which he had stated something like, "Just like Hiranyakasipu was ready to kill his son because he was not a demon, so also we should be ready to kill our children if they are not devotees." Is it true that such a statement was uttered by Bhaktivedanta (and recorded) or is it just another story that goes around?

That's the only even remotely corresponding entry in the Vedabase. I can imagine that someone might have derived something along the lines of what you say from this, though there is clearly an objection to the action undertaken.

Since Sparky is not interested in interacting with me, I don't think there is an issue of a head to head conflict here. However, I would like to comment on his latest post and its whole premise of the supposed superiority of his idea of utopian ideals in opposition to the status quo, which he views as demonic and evil.

We had our company meeting on Wednesday, for the futures trading firm that I just started at last week as a broker. They showed a videotape of part of the recent industry conference in Boca Raton, Florida, which was at a lunch sponsored by the firm and feature a speech by the guest speaker, four star General Tommy Franks, who headed up the invasion of Iraq last year. I won't summarize his entire speech, but he did make a couple of statements worth repeating. First he pointed out that he is registered as an independent. He said that if you are registered as either a Democrat or Republican in Florida, your vote won't be counted. He pointed out that whichever side of the aisle you sit on, it is important to support the troops that are putting themselves in harms way. He mentioned how things have changed since the Viet Nam war, when anyone in uniform was perceived as being part of something evil - how now they are respected and that even Democrats that are harsh critics of the current administration and its military policies still have signs planted on their front lawns that say "Support the troops."

My niece's husband is in Iraq right now. He is a microwave communications specialist in the Marines. Although his duty is not to carry a rifle, and he is not trained to engage in combat, still he has to drive around in a humvee with his equipment and is very much a target for the terrorists and Saddam loyalists. He was shipped to Kuwait for three months right after they returned from their brief honeymoon after the wedding last July. He was sent to Iraq a few weeks ago and could be there for up to a year or more. He and my niece are very young - they could not even drink champagne at the wedding reception, due to being underage.

If you want to view the middle east situation as an Armageddon scenario (if you really are that paranoid), it is difficult at times to tell who is on which side. Politics tends to be nasty business, despite the flowery speeches and idealistic rhetoric. It was nasty business in ancient times as well, no matter what your illusions are about the so called Vedic utopia supposedly run by enlightened Brahmins.

I think where devotees tend to go over the edge is in forgetting that the most important thing is having a political climate favorable to bhajan and that provides a level of religious freedom that allows for public kirtan festivals. After all, if we can't engage in sadhana without fear of persecution or gather together to chant harinam, then life becomes miserable indeed. Canakya Pandit said never trust a politician. At least he got that one right, even if he was a sexist bastard (which apparently he was). On the other hand, we can be leery of the powers that be without going overboard and condemning the whole system for being inherently evil. Do we want to look like a bunch of fanatical extremist zealots, or do we want to appear as sober and wise practitioners of a respectable path to prema bhakti?

Well, I could write more, but I think I have made my point. Besides, although we have the day off, since the markets are closed for Good Friday, I have a whole bunch of tasks for the day. Everyone have a nice Easter, and think of Namacharya Haridas Thakur, who was also whipped in all those marketplaces.

Saraswata.net-
the only truth in the universe.

childish.

Tarunji

You should know better than to repeat offensive hearsay as if it is a fact. You have no way of verifying it so why repeat it.

Question for all of you. Does your guru know you sit around and blashemy other vaisnavas? Would he condone it if he knew?

I am still waiting for the challenge. All you are saying that I'm a blasphemer. Jihad!

Tell me specifically what you disagree with?

This devotee who told us that about homosexuals is a direct disciple of Bhaktivedanta Swami. He did not say it with the intention of putting down his guru, Swamiji, but was thinking it was really a stroke of brilliance on Bhaktivedanta Swami's part on how he viewed homosexuals.

Sehr geehrte Frau Farbissini,

With the rhetoric accelerating at the current pace, you would need to identify yourself before continuing.

Sincerely,
Mod.

Frau Farbissini has kindly encouraged me to ban her, and has expressed her desire to go away from our humble abode of filth and nasty creatures. While not resorting to such drastic measures as banning her, I have made her a moderated member, and while I was at it, I also removed her last post.

Frau, take them fembots and go to Saraswata.Net with your fellow soulmates.

Ist die Frau Farbissini vielleicht nicht auch der Sparky?

Ich weiss nicht, möglicherweise seine weiblichen Gegenstücke.

Hatt er leider uberhaupt nicht. Falsch er die hatte, dan war er nicht so gefrustriert!
Lasste er uns in Ruhe.

Dann organisieren wir ihm eine. Eine die ihm heimzündet.

Well, in one sense Frau is right and I can see how a flippant attitude towards Srila Swami Maharaj would turn people off. I think deep down none of us really mean it but it is just a reaction to years of being force fed that he is the only Way, Truth and the Light. Action-Reaction, etc.
Also, he did make some pretty radical statements which leaves me and alot of other people asking, "whaaaaaaaaaaa?"
How to deal with those statements in a balanced way?
Is it even possible?

Not being a follower of his gives me the priviledge to keep my distance to any such statements, thus comfortably minimizing my need to deal with them in any way whatsoever.

In general, the views and statements of each individual are born of the sum total of his experiences in life. Those radical statements of ACBS are born out of his. If we take the general modern world of values, human rights and all of that, as a criteria, then certainly some of his more radical statements were questionable.

If only people would recognize the subjective aspect of guru-tattva.

If only he had had some level-headed folks around to frankly take up issues with him and question certain things, instead of having a bunch of enthusiastic idealists believing in Swami Absolute Truth, things might have worked out quite differently. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case.

All of these discussions boil down to a single question, "So what?" So, what are you going to do about it? What's the practical outcome of these conclusions? Are we going to do something about it? Are we going to bury the issue as ultimately irrelevant for us, since we are not followers of him and his movement? Are we going to discuss the topic over and over just for the sake of discussing it over and over? In other words, what are we trying to achieve with such discussions? In other words, what's the point?

I also do not call myself a "follower" of his yet I have been influenced by him as have most, if not all, participants on this forum. Also, within western Vaishnava circles there are almost always persons who are followers of his. Therefore, like it or not, we have to face these issues.
None of us live in a vacuum.

I think there is balance needed, simply because a Vaishnava by definition takes the essence, which in this case means seeing the good qualities in others.

We dwell on these matters, I think, because we want to be sure we know what we expect of a Vaishnava. Perhaps Srila Prabhupada said these rather unpleasant things, perhaps he did not. In any case, our concept of pure devotion does not include them.

But I think that once we have established that, we can move on. Let's give Prabhupada all the credit he deserves--which is not inconsiderable. Let's not begrudge him the praise that he earned. What does it profit us to be niggardly? If we see anything of value in his bringing the names of Mahaprabhu, Rupa Goswami, and Radha Krishna to the West, then we must, as Vaishnavas, respect and honor him. Anyone who has a problem with that has a problem with Vaishnavism itself.

All endeavors are covered with some fault, so let's take the essence.

The point is this: I believe that I understand what a Vaishnava is or should be, even though I also know that a Vaishnava is sometimes difficult to recognize. I will personally endeavor to become an ideal, pure Vaishnava in mind, action and words. There are certain words, attitudes or actions that I cannot accept as being worthy of a Vaishnava, but as far as Prabhupada is concerned, I will honor his dedication to Mahaprabhu. Indeed, that is all I wish to see of him, and nothing else.

This is the example I will set for others.

Jagat, you have presented the perfect Vaishnava attitude. I am sure everyone agrees with you. So the question may arise, why did people mentio these unpleasant things about Bhaktivedanta Swami? As I see, it is simply because this is the only Vaishnava forum where somebody can freely express his disagreement with some of the things Bhaktivedanta Swami said or did without being cursed and crucified.

In the morning I was thinking about why some people are overwhelmed with hatred and the spirit of jihad when they read some critical statements about Bhaktivedanta Swami. I came to the following conclusion: once upon a time, many years before, we joined an organization called Iskcon. We were enthusiastic, we sacrificed so many things for it, because we believed it is a pure spiritual group. We considered the group and its leaders, especially the founder, Bhaktivedanta Swami all-good, omnipotent and infallible. But one day the bubble burst. First we had to realize that the movement is just as corrupted and imperfect as all the other religious groups we happily criticized and laughed at on classes. First shock. Then we were even more shocked to learn that the infallible leaders, the great GBCs were not that great and infallible at all. I remember when I first heard about some guru's homosexual deeds and falldown. I just sat there and could not believe my ears. "This cant be true... Prabhupad writes so often in his comments that devotees do not fall down...". Okay, that was the second great shock. At this point many devotees left Iskcon with two different reactions to these saddening facts. Some devotees made the conclusion, that it is all the fault of some corrupt disciples, this has nothing to do with the infallible, all-perfect Bhaktivedanta Swami. Many of them became followers of the rtvik idea. The other type of reaction was to start to doubt about the all-perfect concept of Bhaktivedanta Swami. And this is the point dividing the group of devotees who had left Iskcon. Some of them stil consider Bhaktivedanta Swami as omnipotent and infallible, and some of them think that - as Jagat pointed out - even though he had done wonderful things, he also said or did things one will not necessarily agree with.

There is one thing I do not understand in the behavior of the devotees still deifying Bhaktivedanta Swami. If I consider him perfect, having full trust in him, then why would I bother with going to the forum of the other party and starting jihad against them? I have never seen Madhava or other members going to forums and starting jihad against those who call their gurus and all traditional gurus "sahajiyas". Why? Simply because these devotees have faith in their gurus, therefore no so called offence can shake their faith. If I am absolutely sure about the perfection of Prabhupada, then I will not be bothered when I hear opposing views. I simply leave that forum and continue to serve my all-perfect guru. If, on the contrary, these opposing views shake my life so heavily that I spend all my time visiting "sahajiya" forums and creating "anti-sahajiya" websites, this clearly shows that what I am trying to fight against is not the "sahajiyas", but my own hidden and rejected doubts about Prabhupad. Let me give a very simple example: we, Gaudiya Vaisnavas accept Lord Gauranga as Lord Krishna Himself. We worship Him with all our hearts. Nevertheless, there are millions of people in this world who do not accept Him as God, including many Vaishnavas. So what? Do we ever go and fight them because they do not accept our worshipable Lord? NO! And why not? Simply because we are convinced of His Divinity. We have no doubts. If someone comes up to me and says, "Hey, Caitanya was not an incarnation", I would say, "Okay, this is how you see", and walk on. The same attitude should be applied when someone meets critical remarks about his guru, in this case Prabhupad. "Oh, these guys on this forum do not accept my Prabhupad as infallible and perfect. Okay, I still know that he is perfect, I am absolutely convinced, so I simply do not care what they say, I will never visit this forum again." Thats all. So simple. But no, this is too "mayavad"-like attitude, we want BLOOD, we want jihad, we want to punish and destroy... All that in the name of God.

So this is how I see.

I think there is merit in all the positions, those accepting, those fighting, those ignoring, those transcending. All are needed to complete the spectrum of reality. All are phases we may go through at one time or another.

To bring in a parallel thought: I always wonder about the diversity of characters of people, the diversity of communities existing, the types of culture spread out around the world, the types of philosophy taught. Each one of them has its own dignity and value, and has a right to exist. The same thing is true in the variety of religious expressions, the variety of Parivars in the Gaudiya world as well. What seems like a threatening, anti-human idea, is the drive towards a unified world where everyone is the same, differences are obliterated, where individuality is exstinct. This is an impersonal world created by ideologists. Fortunately, reality as it is goes against this drive of unification. Imagine, the BBT books had indeed become the law-books for the next 10'000 years, everyone had become a Hare Krishna, the standards of art and science established by the Bhaktivedanta Institute.

What a liveless world!

But the ideologists spread a dream of Utopia (The Never-Never-Land), they lead people to aspire for the better, for a perfection which is fortunately unattainable except in individuals who do not impose their ideal on others. Those who do impose open themselves up to criticism, and rightly so. Ideologists like ACBS always claim sacrifice. There are always people fit to die, to be cast away, because they do not fit into the simplified picture of the world. That is the sad side of the story, and it should not be forgotten. Those who are expelled, killed, become criminals or crazy, or sacrifice themselves as scapegoats are as much part of the order of reality. They should not be ignored by us. If we ignore them, or disrespect them, we take on the guilt of their being forgotten and will reenact their fate in generations to come amidst our own.

What should be learnt from all this, is that our own dreams of a unified reality (where everyone is a raganuga bhakta or in a traditional parivar of the-one-and-only kind) should be carefully monitored to allow the diversity of expression that is natural to the Gaudiya-vaishnava world as well. We have ideologists pushing their ideals on this website as well. But Sri Gauranga's tree has many branches, many revelations, many practices. Once it is a unfied world, it is as dead as any ideology, which it can never be, because we are individuals also in spiritual aspirations.

The whole Utopia of the whole world becoming a harekrishna (iskcon style or otherwise) is denied by Shastra in various places:

manusyanam sahasresu kascit yatati siddhaye (B.Gita 7.3)
Of thousands of humans few endeavour for perfection.

koti mukta madhye durlabha ek krishna bhakta (CC)
Amongst millions of liberated souls one devotee of Krishna is rare.

narayana parayana sudurlabha prashantatma kotisvapi maha mune (SB 6.14.5)
Amongst millions of peaceful souls one devotee of Narayan is very rare.

vasudeva sarvam iti sa mahatma sudurlabha (B. Gita 7.19)
A great soul who sees that Vasudeva is everything is very rare.

Endeavouring for a Krishna Conscious planet earth is a sheer waste of one's brief and rare human birth. Preaching is OK, but with realistic targets, and never at the expense of one's own bhajan.

I agree, Openmind, it is disappointment that leads to anger.

I like Nabadip's way of thinking. Understanding leads to forgiveness.

I heard that Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati actually said "Vira rasa in this body, madhura rasa in the next." I only heard this after coming to the same conclusion from observation--at least the vira rasa part. I can't see how the two can really be consolidated (I am not saying they can't be; sex and violence go together, you know.). But for me, the point, like Joseph O'Connell says, is that the madhura bhava is supposed to influence your character and personal dealings in this body.

Edited: Comments largely irrelevant to present turn of discussion.

Jagat, thank you for presenting this vision--it would appear to fit in a modern rendition along the lines of Sva Niyama Dasakam/Dvadasakam. But, I guess there isn't really anything modern about the mood you have epitomized here.

The other day when we spent time together, I kept finding myself expressing criticisms of ISKCOM/GM and finding you offering a broader, consilatory, positive mood. I was impressed with the depth and constancy with which you are prepared to adhere to the mood you have spoken of here. It was edifying--and I raise this here not so much by way of eulogy, although that is fitting also, but because it raises an important point about the nature of cyber dealings: in the often frantic, free-wheeling, open-to-one-and-all nature of the internet, it is often difficult to recognize something truly profound and to be affected by the sanga in the same manner we might be in person. The artificiality of these boxed thoughts, with their embossed blue borders and little 'X' icons in the top right, can give rise to attitudes and actions that take on a nature of their own. Despite the ease with which we can access any manner of trivia or transcendence, and despite the ease with which we can share our opinions and aspirations, we should always remember that there is a responsibility associated with that and a Vaisnava ideal that we, somehow, are to represent.

Kaviraj Goswami says that eloquence is truth spoken concisely. I guess I should have just said, "Thank you. Sadhu!"

Wow Jagatji, that was brilliant!

I think the swan is an apt example of this. Though the swan certainly knows what water is since it swims all day, it is also able to extract milk from a mixture of milk and water and be pleased therein.

Jagat, Openmind and friends,

This discussion has been very healing and helpful in bringing peace to my heart. I especially like your most recent comments. For many years, I have not had Bhaktivedanta Swami's picture on my altar. Yesterday, I added him again. I felt so hurt, violated and angry at him for the breach of trust that I had placed in him. However, by rejecting him, it was like I was rejecting a part of myself. I was not whole. I was not at peace. I feel much better seeing him as the sincere, yet fallible person he was, doing the best he could under the circumstances. I can leave behind the bad and continue with the good as I do the best I can to carry on the tradition in my own imperfect way. Thank you.

I don't think there is waste of any sort in endeavoring for a Krsna Conscious planet earth, or any other kind of Krsna Concious environment for that matter. I think such vision is actually realistic even from the point of view of sastra, and worth of respect too. You could reverse your interpretation of sastra and find that your "very rare this and very rare that" are actually right under your nose.

I would sacrifice my own bhajan if that would help someone else's.

I have a picture of ACBSP on my altar, behind Lalita Prasad Thakur.

very rare, indeed.

Radhe!

i also keep a picture of AC Bhaktivedanta near my altar.

Well Jagat, I think it is something very significant to the topic of brahminhood being discussed here that your gurudeva, who was not a brahmin and who's father did not wear a brahmins thread, wore a brahmins thread. Add to that the fact that your gurudeva was a raganuga vaishnava and traditionally raganuga vaishnavas do not do such things. The question remains, from whom did he get that thread and what was the purpose if he was not a chanter of Brahma gayatri?

Here's a question: why is it a brahmin thread if according to dharma-zAstra all three upper castes may wear it?

As far as I know, the thread is not used for chanting mantras; I recall hearing that this wrapping of the upavita around the thumb while chanting mantras would be one of the peculiarities of Gaudiya Math.

I never asked my Gurudeva wore an upavita. I know that he gave one to his disciple, Bhakta Ma. She used to wear a bright yellow sari without any choli, shaved her head and had this thick upavita hanging very visibly over her shoulder. Used to drive the Gaudiya Math sannyasis nuts.

I am pretty sure he was having them on.

Perhaps, in the spirit of modernizing the tradition, we could start wrapping them around our foreheads in demonstrating that a vaiSNava is beyond all castes and hence need not conform to the general social conventions of caste?

There is great relief in renunciation. When I took vesh from Prabhu, I remember crossing the Ganges at the confluence of the Jalangi and breaking my danda and throwing my upavita into the water. The sun was bright, the water sparkling on a crisp, comfortable winter morning.

Who was Bhakta Ma?
Any history on her?
Does she have any living descendents/followers?
Is she herself still living?

Sorry, can't help much. I haven't been in touch for some time. I'll try to find out.

Thankyou, but who is/was she?

Custodian of Bhaktivinoda's ancestral home.